The problem is, the Daily Show is primarily interested in connecting the dots to "funny" and to the producers/creators/audiences biases, and not connecting the dots to "truth".
One of the most recent management concepts - High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes - combines HOV and pricing strategies by allowing single occupancy vehicles to gain access to HOV lanes by paying a toll. The lanes are "managed" through pricing to maintain free flow conditions even during the height of rush hours. The appeal of this concept is tri-fold:
It expands mobility options in congested urban areas by providing an opportunity for reliable travel times to users prepared to pay a significant premium for this service
It generates a new source of revenue which can be used to pay for transportation improvements, including enhanced transit service
It improves the efficiency of HOV facilities, which is especially important given the recent decline in HOV mode share in 36 of the 40 largest metro areas.
The combined ability of HOT operations to introduce additional traffic to existing HOV facilities, while using price and other management techniques to control the number of additional motorists and maintain high service levels, renders the HOT lane concept a promising means of reducing congestion and improving service on the existing highway system.
If one company chooses to levy a fee for access, does it not follow that consumers would rationally choose to switch to another company, or accept the fee? The idea that the government might pass a law outlawing what should be a simple business policy is frightening.
I'm so tired of people shouting "tort reform!" You have no idea what you're talking about. The frequency of "frivolous lawsuits" is incredibly low. However, the motivation for powerful companies which are often on the receiving end of *legitimate* lawsuits to try and get legislative protection from being sued is enormous.
Take, for instance, medical insurance companies. They would have you believe that "virtually every suit" is frivolous. That could not be more false. More than 90% of the suits which are brought are absolutely valid, but if the insurance companies have their way they will prevent the 90% by exaggerating the 10%. That means that if YOU get legitimately screwed by your insurance company (for example, they refuse to pay for a life saving procedure for your wife. She dies and you go bankrupt trying to pay the bills. Happens all the time) you will have no recourse. The law will prevent you from being made whole again (haha... as if that could happen with money alone), instead of a Judge and Jury.
Who benefits? The legislators who get massive kickbacks from the insurance companies. They get a re-election payday, and big insurance gets 90% of their cases thrown out. On top of that, new bankruptcy laws prevent you from cancelling out $100k+ debt to the hospital. Instead, your wages get partially diverted to them for the next 20 years. (Still feeling warm and fuzzy about that "Bush/Cheney" bumper sticker on your car?)
Sounds like the problem is yours, mate. It is YOU who is self-loathing -- not everybody else. Recognize the difference.
And to the hypocrisy:
And isn't it curious that the party that has made abortion rights a perpetual issue is accusing Bush of having one? Yes, they claim hypocrisy, but don't they have a mirror in their house?
What does "a mirror in their house" mean, anyway? The point is, do hypocrites who publicly decry particular behaviors and then privately engage in them have a mirror in their house?
It always seems that the lifestyle police "see the light" when it is their OWN family. Cases in point: Cheney realizes his daughter is a lesbo, and suddenly softens on his anti-gay-marriage position. Jeb Bush's daughter is arrested with drugs, and suddenly he's in favor of treatment, not incarceration. (BTW, the girl then smoked CRACK in rehab. Way to go!)
The list goes on and on. And, no -- I am NOT a hypocrite, and YES -- I have plenty of "mirrors in my house". It takes effort to be honest and recognize when you were wrong. Which is exactly the opposite of what a hypocrite does.
Coincidently, admitting when you are wrong (you know: "W" for "Wrong") is also something the present administration is incapable of doing.
"Write Once, Run Everywhere" is not a good reason to use Java. In fact, I believe that ANY language can have that feature if you're willing to install 14.5 MEGS of software on the target platform (current size of the JVM for Windows).
Compare this to Perl for Windows (from Active State) -- only 8 megs. If you apply the economic principle of Comparative Advantage to the download "cost" of a portable language, it is clear that even Perl is a better choice for "Write Once, Run Everywhere" than Java.
I'm tired of media pundits announcing that there's a "Digital Pearl Harbor" on the horizon.
I doubt it's ever going to happen. Not like they think, anyway.
Just read CERT, Bugtraq... there are new exploits, worms and viruses coming out every day. Not a day goes by without someone trying to hack into the Pentagon or the telephone company or the power grid.
What's the difference between that and the so-called "Digital Pearl Harbor"?
And while I'm thinking about it -- who is a terrorist going to find to write some "super worm" who is more capable than a 16 year-old with modem?
Go shoot your precious linux server with a.44, and see if it's still up. I'd guess the answer is no. Doing the same with a properly configured SunFire 15k would result in a high replacement cost, but an up and running system nonetheless.
REALLY? Humm... Maybe I'll shoot the power button, and you won't be able to turn it on!
"Linux is the second most commonly used operating system. Linux has been consistently gaining share since this survey started, but interestingly not significantly to Windows detriment. Operating systems which have lost share have been Solaris and other proprietary operating systems, and to a small degree BSD."
Also, why didn't the article spell out the loser? It's Sun, Sun, Sun, Sun, SUN! Sun is getting clobbered on all fronts. Their hardware is nice, but not so nice that is it needed for 90% of the applications on which it is used.
Solaris, their operating system, has few advantages over Linux, nowadays. Frankly, without adding the GNU tools, Solaris is virtually unusable! (And, who's gonna pay $10k for their compiler when GCC does the job?)
Sun is about to hit a brick wall. Unless they change direction dramatically, Linux is going to gobble them up, just as SGI consumed Cray. Cray was meaningful for a long time, until the capabilities of "Minis" (as Supercomputer folk like to refer to UNIX machines) silently approched the power of super computers at a fraction of the cost.
The same is happening with Linux-Sun. For a small fraction of the cost, Linux on commodity hardware (Intel) is approching the power of Sun's products. It's inevitable, without some sigificant change.
Slashdot Mirror
~$1B == 50,000,000 users * $19 per user.
50,000,000 users == the number of potential users, according to the "Google Exec" in the press release.
$19 per user == the price the plaintiff was going to sell the product for.
For Truth(iness), I watch the Colbert Report.
Some people here have likened this to "payola". A better analogy would be high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes:
One of the most recent management concepts - High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes - combines HOV and pricing strategies by allowing single occupancy vehicles to gain access to HOV lanes by paying a toll. The lanes are "managed" through pricing to maintain free flow conditions even during the height of rush hours. The appeal of this concept is tri-fold:
The combined ability of HOT operations to introduce additional traffic to existing HOV facilities, while using price and other management techniques to control the number of additional motorists and maintain high service levels, renders the HOT lane concept a promising means of reducing congestion and improving service on the existing highway system.
If one company chooses to levy a fee for access, does it not follow that consumers would rationally choose to switch to another company, or accept the fee? The idea that the government might pass a law outlawing what should be a simple business policy is frightening.
This has got to be the stupidest experiment, ever. They truly have no reason to be up there.
In your world, the Judges benefit... how exactly?
I'm so tired of people shouting "tort reform!" You have no idea what you're talking about. The frequency of "frivolous lawsuits" is incredibly low. However, the motivation for powerful companies which are often on the receiving end of *legitimate* lawsuits to try and get legislative protection from being sued is enormous.
Take, for instance, medical insurance companies. They would have you believe that "virtually every suit" is frivolous. That could not be more false. More than 90% of the suits which are brought are absolutely valid, but if the insurance companies have their way they will prevent the 90% by exaggerating the 10%. That means that if YOU get legitimately screwed by your insurance company (for example, they refuse to pay for a life saving procedure for your wife. She dies and you go bankrupt trying to pay the bills. Happens all the time) you will have no recourse. The law will prevent you from being made whole again (haha... as if that could happen with money alone), instead of a Judge and Jury.
Who benefits? The legislators who get massive kickbacks from the insurance companies. They get a re-election payday, and big insurance gets 90% of their cases thrown out. On top of that, new bankruptcy laws prevent you from cancelling out $100k+ debt to the hospital. Instead, your wages get partially diverted to them for the next 20 years. (Still feeling warm and fuzzy about that "Bush/Cheney" bumper sticker on your car?)
That's what people said about Linux in the 90's. Give it time. MySQL is a steamroller. Get out of the way or become part of the road!
Check out my new outfit. It's made from the finest one-atom thick fabric. It's no thin, you can't see it. But really -- it's there!
Does is make me a "moderate" if I agree with half of these?
And to the hypocrisy:
And isn't it curious that the party that has made abortion rights a perpetual issue is accusing Bush of having one? Yes, they claim hypocrisy, but don't they have a mirror in their house?
What does "a mirror in their house" mean, anyway? The point is, do hypocrites who publicly decry particular behaviors and then privately engage in them have a mirror in their house?
It always seems that the lifestyle police "see the light" when it is their OWN family. Cases in point: Cheney realizes his daughter is a lesbo, and suddenly softens on his anti-gay-marriage position. Jeb Bush's daughter is arrested with drugs, and suddenly he's in favor of treatment, not incarceration. (BTW, the girl then smoked CRACK in rehab. Way to go!)
The list goes on and on. And, no -- I am NOT a hypocrite, and YES -- I have plenty of "mirrors in my house". It takes effort to be honest and recognize when you were wrong. Which is exactly the opposite of what a hypocrite does.
Coincidently, admitting when you are wrong (you know: "W" for "Wrong") is also something the present administration is incapable of doing.
"Write Once, Run Everywhere" is not a good reason to use Java. In fact, I believe that ANY language can have that feature if you're willing to install 14.5 MEGS of software on the target platform (current size of the JVM for Windows).
Compare this to Perl for Windows (from Active State) -- only 8 megs. If you apply the economic principle of Comparative Advantage to the download "cost" of a portable language, it is clear that even Perl is a better choice for "Write Once, Run Everywhere" than Java.
I'm tired of media pundits announcing that there's a "Digital Pearl Harbor" on the horizon.
I doubt it's ever going to happen. Not like they think, anyway.
Just read CERT, Bugtraq... there are new exploits, worms and viruses coming out every day. Not a day goes by without someone trying to hack into the Pentagon or the telephone company or the power grid.
What's the difference between that and the so-called "Digital Pearl Harbor"?
And while I'm thinking about it -- who is a terrorist going to find to write some "super worm" who is more capable than a 16 year-old with modem?
REALLY? Humm... Maybe I'll shoot the power button, and you won't be able to turn it on!
Heh...
How amusing is it that a federal court had to tell an adult college professor to not be a theiving bastard? Holy gheeze!
Solaris, their operating system, has few advantages over Linux, nowadays. Frankly, without adding the GNU tools, Solaris is virtually unusable! (And, who's gonna pay $10k for their compiler when GCC does the job?)
Sun is about to hit a brick wall. Unless they change direction dramatically, Linux is going to gobble them up, just as SGI consumed Cray. Cray was meaningful for a long time, until the capabilities of "Minis" (as Supercomputer folk like to refer to UNIX machines) silently approched the power of super computers at a fraction of the cost.
The same is happening with Linux-Sun. For a small fraction of the cost, Linux on commodity hardware (Intel) is approching the power of Sun's products. It's inevitable, without some sigificant change.
What do you do for money? I assume it has something to do with computers! Do you to a lousey job just because you're getting paid? Of course not!
Get a grip!