They also only work in a small subset of problems, and only if you have formal specification that you can compare against. For most problems there is no formal spec, because writing one would be similar in complexity as writing the program.
Seriously, 30 man-years for verifying 7500 lines of code? That's just not practical. And how can we be sure that the verification process itself is correct ?
Whenever there is inflation, the government could tax. Whenever there is deflation, the government could print debt free money
This is very much like a centrally planned economy, where the government decides where to invest and what kind of production to grow. These kinds of economies don't have a very good track record.
If you want to allow private enterprise, you'll need a way to get money directly to the entrepreneur, without government approval. Bank loans are a fairly efficient way to achieve that.
If you think structural engineering is not done on deadlines and budgets, you're kidding yourself.
No, I meant that in the case of software development, a thorough verification (as far as that's possible) would take 10x as much time and budget as is available in most cases. And mathematical proof only works if you have a 100% correct specification.
In structural engineering, at least the deadline and budget allow for an acceptable verification.
Formal verification only moves the problem from the implementation to the specification. Writing a sufficiently detailed and unambiguous specification is the same as programming, but in a different language.
Depends on where you're from. In some countries, a degree at a technical university will allow you to call yourself an 'engineer', even including a special engineer title you can put in front/behind of your name.
Of course, when you learn to design a building, they teach you how you can calculate whether the building is strong enough. There are methods and tools for that purpose.
For software, there are no tools or methods that you can use to determine if a program has some fatal bugs. You're on your own, and usually with a tight deadline and no budget.
How remote can your farm be ? There aren't that many remote places on earth, and if they are really remote, they'll be unsuitable for farming. Also, oil isn't going to run out in one day.
There's also an upper limit on the differential in gun capabilities to kill in a one-on-one situation.
Who says it's a one-on-one situation ? People with a farm will be a tiny minority, so it's more like a 100 to 1 situation.
I've watched the video before, and it doesn't get the details right. Besides, it doesn't give you any references, so it's worthless as an argument.
The effect in the end is similar: money is created. The only difference is that the video makes you think the banks don't have any risk, and take all the profits, which simply isn't true. Banks suffer the consequences just as badly.
It does, because the deposits still count as money.
- I take $1000 to the bank. - Bank is allowed to loan out $900 based on 10% reserve requirements. - That $900 is used to buy some stuff in a store. - The merchant deposits that $900 in his bank account - Bank can loan out 90% of $900 = $810 again.
Total loans from the bank already $900 + $810, and I still have $1000 in my account, and the merchant still has $900.
And that $810 will be deposited again... and 90% of that will be loaned again, and so on...
It's so odd that the banks can make a profit on something they don't even have -- the money they loan is loaned into existence and then they get real money back as profit.
No, it's not odd. Banks loan out deposits from savers, and the interest covers the risk that the loan won't be repaid in full.
They make a profit when the economy is growing, and people are able to make payments on their loan.
On the other hand (as we have witnessed), when the economy goes south, and people default on their loans, the little bit of interest doesn't cover the losses anymore, and banks go out of business.
Read the wiki page on fractional reserve banking, and how it increases money in circulation. Paying off debt is the same process in reverse.
A simple example: when I loan you $1000, and you give me an IOU in return, that IOU can be traded around, so it counts as money. In the mean time, that $1000 can also be traded. So, in effect there's a total of $2000 around from a single $1000 loan.
With adblockers, the text doesn't always flow nicely around the place where the ad used to be. So, if you want to print HTML from a website, even with ads blocked, you rarely get a good looking result. Even if there are no ads on the page, HTML designers add way too much crap to a page, with extra graphics, lines, borders, fading colors, etc...
In contrast PDFs I read (mostly datasheets and user manuals) are often much cleaner in design.
You'll read that banks can only loan out 90% of the money they take in. However, that 90% will at some point in the future be deposited, so the banks can loan 90% of that money out again. In the end, this results in a 9x money multiplier, but every dollar that the bank loaned out is covered by a deposit.
Paying off the debt takes that money out of circulation again. As a consequence the money that's left over will become more valuable, and prices will drop. This could result in a deflationary spiral according to many economists.
PDFs don't flow text, which makes them crap for online reading
It's also an advantage, because if the text doesn't flow, it's much harder to change it dynamically, which makes it much harder to put advertisements in there.
Only if there's an option to keep your preferences. It seems that is has become fashionable for the designers to force their own personal preference on all the users, and remove options for customization.
Slashdot Mirror
They also only work in a small subset of problems, and only if you have formal specification that you can compare against. For most problems there is no formal spec, because writing one would be similar in complexity as writing the program.
Seriously, 30 man-years for verifying 7500 lines of code? That's just not practical. And how can we be sure that the verification process itself is correct ?
This is very much like a centrally planned economy, where the government decides where to invest and what kind of production to grow. These kinds of economies don't have a very good track record.
If you want to allow private enterprise, you'll need a way to get money directly to the entrepreneur, without government approval. Bank loans are a fairly efficient way to achieve that.
No, I meant that in the case of software development, a thorough verification (as far as that's possible) would take 10x as much time and budget as is available in most cases. And mathematical proof only works if you have a 100% correct specification.
In structural engineering, at least the deadline and budget allow for an acceptable verification.
I completely failed to grasp the parent's nonsense, which you repeat here.
Please show a reputable source that confirms that a bank may issue a loan for $100 backed by a $10 deposit.
While you search for your reference, you can look at mine:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Modern_Money_Mechanics.pdf
(page 6 to 11 explains the expansion process)
Formal verification only moves the problem from the implementation to the specification. Writing a sufficiently detailed and unambiguous specification is the same as programming, but in a different language.
Depends on where you're from. In some countries, a degree at a technical university will allow you to call yourself an 'engineer', even including a special engineer title you can put in front/behind of your name.
Of course, when you learn to design a building, they teach you how you can calculate whether the building is strong enough. There are methods and tools for that purpose.
For software, there are no tools or methods that you can use to determine if a program has some fatal bugs. You're on your own, and usually with a tight deadline and no budget.
Yeah, after I posted, I realized that this article was about the 2006 version. I thought it was about the new design with the Broadcom SoC.
How remote can your farm be ? There aren't that many remote places on earth, and if they are really remote, they'll be unsuitable for farming. Also, oil isn't going to run out in one day.
Who says it's a one-on-one situation ? People with a farm will be a tiny minority, so it's more like a 100 to 1 situation.
Does that include people invested through a retirement fund ?
Sure, as long as 198 other workers are the 99%.
Instead of watching the video, look at the wiki page, and its references. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fractional_reserve_banking#Money_creation
I've watched the video before, and it doesn't get the details right. Besides, it doesn't give you any references, so it's worthless as an argument.
The effect in the end is similar: money is created. The only difference is that the video makes you think the banks don't have any risk, and take all the profits, which simply isn't true. Banks suffer the consequences just as badly.
If you start now with your subsistence farm, you'll fail just as hard.
Somebody with a bigger gun will just shoot you, rape your wife, and eat your crops.
It does, because the deposits still count as money.
- I take $1000 to the bank.
- Bank is allowed to loan out $900 based on 10% reserve requirements.
- That $900 is used to buy some stuff in a store.
- The merchant deposits that $900 in his bank account
- Bank can loan out 90% of $900 = $810 again.
Total loans from the bank already $900 + $810, and I still have $1000 in my account, and the merchant still has $900.
And that $810 will be deposited again... and 90% of that will be loaned again, and so on...
No, it's not odd. Banks loan out deposits from savers, and the interest covers the risk that the loan won't be repaid in full.
They make a profit when the economy is growing, and people are able to make payments on their loan.
On the other hand (as we have witnessed), when the economy goes south, and people default on their loans, the little bit of interest doesn't cover the losses anymore, and banks go out of business.
So you can also use it as a razor ?
Read the wiki page on fractional reserve banking, and how it increases money in circulation. Paying off debt is the same process in reverse.
A simple example: when I loan you $1000, and you give me an IOU in return, that IOU can be traded around, so it counts as money. In the mean time, that $1000 can also be traded. So, in effect there's a total of $2000 around from a single $1000 loan.
With adblockers, the text doesn't always flow nicely around the place where the ad used to be. So, if you want to print HTML from a website, even with ads blocked, you rarely get a good looking result. Even if there are no ads on the page, HTML designers add way too much crap to a page, with extra graphics, lines, borders, fading colors, etc...
In contrast PDFs I read (mostly datasheets and user manuals) are often much cleaner in design.
You completely misunderstand the fractional reserve banking system. Go read it again: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fractional_reserve_banking
You'll read that banks can only loan out 90% of the money they take in. However, that 90% will at some point in the future be deposited, so the banks can loan 90% of that money out again. In the end, this results in a 9x money multiplier, but every dollar that the bank loaned out is covered by a deposit.
Fractional reserve banking brings additional money in circulation by borrowing. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fractional_reserve_banking
Paying off the debt takes that money out of circulation again. As a consequence the money that's left over will become more valuable, and prices will drop. This could result in a deflationary spiral according to many economists.
How did you get those numbers ?
If the US didn't borrow so much, there would also be less dollars in circulation, and less need to invest them back into Treasury bonds.
I'm waiting for the model that allows two-handed typing.
It's also an advantage, because if the text doesn't flow, it's much harder to change it dynamically, which makes it much harder to put advertisements in there.
Only if there's an option to keep your preferences. It seems that is has become fashionable for the designers to force their own personal preference on all the users, and remove options for customization.