In this case, Java has what the industry needs: a well-known ABI/API, code signing, medium horsepower, multithreading, and beer-freedom. This doesn't seem to me like it's outside the capabilities of a lower-midrange ARM SoC. Who needs real-time software when you have easily enough volume to justify real-time silicon?
Yeah, isn't that disgusting that the gubmint gives tax breaks to you only if you give some of that money to otherwise useless middlemen?
And without a futures market, how will the commodity be traded? First you ask yourself why you should need a middle man. Then you cut him out and sell directly to refineries.
This means that American companies are become more about branding and less about development. You mean like the $50 Krups espresso maker that is, with the exception of the covers, the identical machine to the $40 Melitta? (Which also shares more than a few mechanical similarities to the $30 Mr. Coffee?)
Development is just seen as cost and high risk. This is an excellent example of why we need public funding for basic research. Because otherwise it either gets done seven times over in secret, or it just never gets done.
I once worked for a company that spent six figures on automation to make a volume part for a popular automobile. The company expected they were going to free up a low-level operator (read: eliminate a job). What actually happened was that the robot was so unreliable, what with dropping/throwing parts and spilling trays, they had to have a higher-level operator there to run the robot AND restart the whole mess more often after the inevitable and inexplicable failures!
you do realize that Buffet makes his billions by *not* telling you what he's doing, right? That is his whole strategy, of trying to be ahead of the curve. Actually, he seems unusually transparent for someone in finance. He buys for the long haul, longer than most people's attention spans and longer than most people can afford. You don't have to trade on a disparity of information when you actually get dividends.
Of course, our current admin would not fudge figures or lie to us now, would they?
What's with people trying to politicize this? There are a lot of people gathering statistics and calculating the numbers, and many of them have an agenda to bring you bad news (that is their bread and butter). This continued insistence that it's all a Bush administration dupe is just bizarre. You know you really wanted to say "librul media" but knew you'd get bitch-slapped if you did.
I say it's more of a Bush administration dope. There are some things that just don't make it into your consciousness when you're that far above the poverty line.
The press lives off money. Money comes from advertisers. Advertisers come from viewers. Viewers come from bad news. Bad news that contradicts the advertisers scares advertisers away. It is, then, in the press' best interest to paint a picture that is at least hopeful and not to scratch too deeply.
There is exactly one measure that matters in the minds of most individuals (and we will kindly thank you to treat us as such and not as consumers) -- standard of living, which is roughly proportional to wages divided by stuff. Actual wages divided by stuff has been dropping for quite a while now, and it is only through the home equity ATM that people have managed to continue a high pace of purchasing stuff.
You don't need a degree in disproven 19th century physics models loosely adapted to finance to recognize this. What you need are open eyes, an ability to look outside your models and a year or two basking in the human misery that is poverty.
As for nationalization at the flick of a pen, that cuts both ways. Very true, if the US had a whole lot worth nationalizing that isn't already cheaper somewhere else.
As for your sig, child porn is far from mere thought-crime: consider the fact that by consuming it you are supporting the creation of it, and thus supporting the exploitation of children. We used to hear this moral outrage from the second-wave feminists all the time. Is porn a moral outrage or a moral outlet? (As with most instances of moral outrage, scientific study disfavors the position of the outraged.)
Consider the unintended consequences of your lines of reasoning before you offer them. How about high fructose corn syrup? Displaying the female ankle? Sweatshop goods? SUVs? Clearly your reasoning works well in the case in point and a few other places, but I don't believe you might consistently apply your reasoning to everything without putting rather a lot of stones through your own windows.
What good are the scientists to America that is more than the good that would go to the rest of the world? Or are you proposing that US taxpayers should pay for the good of all mankind and expect nothing in return? US exceptionalism has this funny way of making USians think they are not themselves a component of "all mankind".
Stop thinking about this from the standpoint of a "market-state" and try it from the standpoint of a "nation-state". What have increases in US international trade done for US standard of living?
I might point out that both the hippy PETA kids and a coming deficiency in energy flows would both suggest an urgent need for population reduction over the next few decades, attrition being possibly the most humane way. Who's listening to that? Certainly not The Man, whose answer to the problem is breeder tax credits, counter-effective "faith-based" sex ed and whacking the Middle East hornet's nest like a piñata.
Good sense would also suggest reserving ANWR for last and not sucking it down right away just because lazy WASPs who put their money on internal-combustion-powered ponies are bitching about gasoline prices. The last country with oil under the ground wins.
I think it might be harder than you think. If TPM is built into the chipset, that's one thing. Eventually you're going to have to have some sort of plaintext riding across the bus somewhere, and that plus full access to physical memory might be enough to get you some important key information. If TPM makes it into the CPU, you have considerably less of the full picture at hand.
Adding an encryption chip may prevent the piracy from those who can afford it, but like something for nothing. Now they'll be forced to pay up if they really want the game. It''s a no-brainer win situation for the developers. Bushnell forgot something. It really isn't in the media companies' interest to completely kill freeloading, as network effects apply here. A certain level of market penetration is necessary for video gaming to be popular. If you, as a game company, protect your work against most or all of the freeloaders, you'll find yourself losing some paying players who were playing for social reasons rather than the intrinsics of the game.
What's going to happen to the players you lost? Those folks might replace their video game consumption with some other consumable entertainment (card gaming, meatspace RPGs, television, recreational substances) or an improvement in their standard of living, and become a little less interested in what's going on in video gaming. No media powerhouse wants their market to shrink from fashionable to otaku.
Now you'll also convert some freeloaders to paying players, but I think a lot of people will decide that their money is better spent on living and decline to be part of the video gaming community.
In using TPM on your next blockbuster you might also steer people to your TPM-free competitors, some of whom will buy the game just because you're a dick and the competitor isn't.
That said, I think the real value of TPM in gaming will be seen in improving gameplay by blacklisting cheaters, farmers and other undesirables.
Now, if there was a licence that said "all the code in this package is GPL, if you use any of it you're bound to releases any changes you make to the code in this package only. Linked/compiled/merged/etc etc code that you add to it does not need to be re-released, only changes to the code you received", then you would see a huge uptake in OSS code in commercial projects, they'd be happy to use it, and you'd be happy to see improvements released back, and users would be happy because we'd be reusing tons of code. Isn't that essentially what the LGPL is? As long as you leave some separate.so file that a user can build from some open source release and drop into your system, are your obligations to the LGPL not being met?
Otherwise no closed-source software for Linux would exist because you couldn't legally link to bloody printf, Mozilla, xanim, and several other seminal multimedia products for Linux would never have been, and we'd be no further along than the HURD.
Transparency does indeed benefit trust. Black budgets of unknown size, censorship of infrastructure information more inconvenient than sensitive, staged suicides of people who know too much, and a consistent pattern of a government violating its own rules against individuals and small entities while asserting even more rules favorable to itself and large entities don't really qualify as trust-inspiring.
The new drug benefit defies reason since it was passed by the Republicans. It's largely a wealth redistribution program that takes money from patients and gives it to big pharma who haven't done anything of value for society that wouldn't have otherwise been done if people could fund basic research instead of big pharma's profits.
Slashdot Mirror
In this case, Java has what the industry needs: a well-known ABI/API, code signing, medium horsepower, multithreading, and beer-freedom. This doesn't seem to me like it's outside the capabilities of a lower-midrange ARM SoC. Who needs real-time software when you have easily enough volume to justify real-time silicon?
Overdraft fees are how they make their money now that "free checking" is the norm.
I once worked for a company that spent six figures on automation to make a volume part for a popular automobile. The company expected they were going to free up a low-level operator (read: eliminate a job). What actually happened was that the robot was so unreliable, what with dropping/throwing parts and spilling trays, they had to have a higher-level operator there to run the robot AND restart the whole mess more often after the inevitable and inexplicable failures!
What's with people trying to politicize this? There are a lot of people gathering statistics and calculating the numbers, and many of them have an agenda to bring you bad news (that is their bread and butter). This continued insistence that it's all a Bush administration dupe is just bizarre. You know you really wanted to say "librul media" but knew you'd get bitch-slapped if you did.
I say it's more of a Bush administration dope. There are some things that just don't make it into your consciousness when you're that far above the poverty line.
The press lives off money. Money comes from advertisers. Advertisers come from viewers. Viewers come from bad news. Bad news that contradicts the advertisers scares advertisers away. It is, then, in the press' best interest to paint a picture that is at least hopeful and not to scratch too deeply.
There is exactly one measure that matters in the minds of most individuals (and we will kindly thank you to treat us as such and not as consumers) -- standard of living, which is roughly proportional to wages divided by stuff. Actual wages divided by stuff has been dropping for quite a while now, and it is only through the home equity ATM that people have managed to continue a high pace of purchasing stuff.
You don't need a degree in disproven 19th century physics models loosely adapted to finance to recognize this. What you need are open eyes, an ability to look outside your models and a year or two basking in the human misery that is poverty.
If you want to find out where corporations learned the art of externalizing costs, look no further than sugar grandma.
Consider the unintended consequences of your lines of reasoning before you offer them. How about high fructose corn syrup? Displaying the female ankle? Sweatshop goods? SUVs? Clearly your reasoning works well in the case in point and a few other places, but I don't believe you might consistently apply your reasoning to everything without putting rather a lot of stones through your own windows.
What good are the scientists to America that is more than the good that would go to the rest of the world? Or are you proposing that US taxpayers should pay for the good of all mankind and expect nothing in return? US exceptionalism has this funny way of making USians think they are not themselves a component of "all mankind".
Stop thinking about this from the standpoint of a "market-state" and try it from the standpoint of a "nation-state". What have increases in US international trade done for US standard of living?
how about charset=UTF-8 already?
I might point out that both the hippy PETA kids and a coming deficiency in energy flows would both suggest an urgent need for population reduction over the next few decades, attrition being possibly the most humane way. Who's listening to that? Certainly not The Man, whose answer to the problem is breeder tax credits, counter-effective "faith-based" sex ed and whacking the Middle East hornet's nest like a piñata.
Good sense would also suggest reserving ANWR for last and not sucking it down right away just because lazy WASPs who put their money on internal-combustion-powered ponies are bitching about gasoline prices. The last country with oil under the ground wins.
I think it might be harder than you think. If TPM is built into the chipset, that's one thing. Eventually you're going to have to have some sort of plaintext riding across the bus somewhere, and that plus full access to physical memory might be enough to get you some important key information. If TPM makes it into the CPU, you have considerably less of the full picture at hand.
What's going to happen to the players you lost? Those folks might replace their video game consumption with some other consumable entertainment (card gaming, meatspace RPGs, television, recreational substances) or an improvement in their standard of living, and become a little less interested in what's going on in video gaming. No media powerhouse wants their market to shrink from fashionable to otaku.
Now you'll also convert some freeloaders to paying players, but I think a lot of people will decide that their money is better spent on living and decline to be part of the video gaming community.
In using TPM on your next blockbuster you might also steer people to your TPM-free competitors, some of whom will buy the game just because you're a dick and the competitor isn't.
That said, I think the real value of TPM in gaming will be seen in improving gameplay by blacklisting cheaters, farmers and other undesirables.
Then tell your imaginary friend to tell Sony to give people full and unfettered access to the GPUs they paid a sizable amount of money for.
Goodlatte? You mean the one who makes a point of ignoring anyone from outside of his district? Who's the big IP holder in his neck of the woods?
Otherwise no closed-source software for Linux would exist because you couldn't legally link to bloody printf, Mozilla, xanim, and several other seminal multimedia products for Linux would never have been, and we'd be no further along than the HURD.
Transparency does indeed benefit trust. Black budgets of unknown size, censorship of infrastructure information more inconvenient than sensitive, staged suicides of people who know too much, and a consistent pattern of a government violating its own rules against individuals and small entities while asserting even more rules favorable to itself and large entities don't really qualify as trust-inspiring.
Wealth redistribution upwards = good. Wealth redistribution downwards = bad.
It can't be that it's thirty minutes from everything, could it?
I am curious. Why would they be moving? Is it just a coinkydink that SourceForge is updating their privacy policy at the same time?
Does anyone know how this works in Michigan?
but make sure stupid fees, golden parachutes, and the "Japanese tourist discount" apply.