And laws Congress writes aren't supreme right now. You might as well say things the Lieutenant tells you to do aren't orders right now. Regulations have the force of law. Agencies have the authority to write them because Congress handed them that authority, and Congress had that authority because we handed it to them. Your daddy didn't teach you this? Didn't care enough to check whether the schools did?
The EFF and President Obama are vocal proponents of net neutrality, and the the EFF makes specific suggestions for how the FCC could claim, in a way that might stand up in court, legal authority to mandate it. The EFF's objection is not that the FCC lacks the authority to issue the regulations, but that the legal basis they've chosen to defend it could hardly be better calculated to torpedo any chance of exercising it. This is easily demonstrated from your own cites. From the latest of them -- it's very digestibly short, I don't understand how anyone could miss the point,
While we're big fans of net neutrality, we worry that the FCC may want to build its net neutrality regulations on a rotten legal foundation
and
it's hard to imagine a less stable legal footing than the theory that the D.C. Court of Appeals just rejected in the Comcast ruling
and
Title II would certainly provide a more stable, and narrower, basis of authority to impose open network rules, as well as other regulations familiar to telecommunications providers.
The EFF drily say they "might like" FCC regulations mandating honest traffic management and "might not like" FCC regulations pandering to moralists and middlemen.
I've been trying to find an open letter written around the time Israel was established. I only dimly remember the body, and I can't remember whether he openly referred to Winston Churchill's speech on the mere prospect, but this man and his country were facing the reality: occupation, unprovoked. He was much less quotably, much more quietly, just as eloquent. The people there had no reason to give a good God Damn for where anybody came from, that had been their home for a thousand years. The man described the situation, in detail and closed with
"Deliberately introducing flaws": I don't know where the actual failure in their code was, but truetype rendering is done by a full virtual machine. This isn't an exaggeration. Do chase that link: that machine is not simple, not by any measure. They're firing up an arbitrary user-supplied VM image in the kernel, and yes I say that constitutes a conscious introduction of a security flaw. Nobody could possibly have thought that was safe.
True but obviously irrelevant statements "have no bearing" on the point. You might as well have said the air is cleaner now than it was then because we've had the EPA longer. It's true, but it's got nothing to do with them gratuitously importing an interpreter for an unusual, sophisticated VM into their kernel and then using that interpreter to run arbitrary VM images from userland. I gots a little clue for you: that was never, ever, ever safe, and they knew it. They did it deliberately.
Give it up. There's a difference between not being perfect and deliberately introducing flaws. Not one of your other objections has any bearing at all.
Hmm, let's see, half the price of an iMac, let's say you're talking about duplicating a 27" iMac for $900, that's a nice machine. You're going to offer that for what price? Margin has to be what, let's say you just want to live decently in Coeur d'Alene, $50K/yr might be enough, that's $3K/mo for a house and insurance and the kids' education, the odd vacation and a little nest egg. Figure your customers call you for support once a year on average, product lifetime three years. At a few hundred cheaper than the iMac you'll be building two a week and fielding about one support call a day. Not bad, there's some safety margin there and you've somehow gotten a few hundred customers for a business you run out of your home. You'll never be able to lease real estate for your business at that rate, and nobody's sued you yet. Life is good. Go for it. All you have to do is post pictures of your product next to 27" iMac and a Dell, convince about a hundred people a year that yours is the one they want, and bet your mortgage and family on it. It could work.
Nice job addressing six words, pretending the rest aren't there. Care to explain how the people who design and build and grow are lazy? Or why you think the people who make their living writing and painting and singing are lazy? Or in what world anyone believes global companies aren't designed and built and grown?
There's nothing sinister about this.
Of course there's nothing sinister about the parts you're willing to discuss, but your devotion to discussing only the good parts of your model and the bad parts (even when you have to invent them) of anyone else's can convince no one but the lazy.
As I recall, the Temple of Man was built wide, and low to the ground.
Attracting income is a separate skill from creating wealth. Wealth is designed and built and grown, and the people who generate it design and build and grow. It's written and painted and sung.
There are people who can only attract income and social position. They're the ones who think it's smart to get other people to generate the wealth but keep the income for themselves. They call themselves "the productive people".
I hope that when I do watch the video, I turn out wrong and Coyne was fair and objective all the time. Otherwise he'd damage atheism more than support it.
Yeah, then, um, don't watch the video. Religion and science use language in different ways. Religion speaks implicitly, in imagery and metaphor, science explicity. Neither of those two arguments seem very likely to make it across that bridge to achieve communication, but Haught was at least clearly trying. I can't figure out who Coyne was trying to reach.
Or, as I suspect Coyne would have put it and to use language he'd apparently be more likely to understand, on the subject of religion I wouldn't engage him any more than I would a self-righteous creationist teenager, and for the same reasons.
Compilers can take advantage of model-specific instruction scheduling idiosyncracies and get major performance boosts. Why shouldn't OS's take advantage of thread-scheduling idiosyncracies for similar boosts? If AMD's chip can deliver equivalent performance cheaper, but only if your OS knows how to use it, then if your OS hasn't been taught how to do that yet, what needs fixing is your OS.
In the mid-1930's when Social Security was introduced, life expectancy for all workers was age 65 or higher. Even in 1900, the average 40-year-old would reach age 70. People who made it to age 65 in 1940 would live another 12.8 years on average. In 2006, it was 18.5 years. That's about a 45% longer payout period from 1940 to 2006. Nonfarm worker productivity from 1947 to 2007 increased by ~5500%. That isn't a typo, that's five thousand five hundred percent more productive. Assuming all workers survive to age 65 now instead of just half of them, that's a per-worker 5500% increase in production supporting a per-worker 300% increase in supported retirement (each worker who gets to age 65 lives half again as long, that's 150% the payout length; twice as many actually get there).
Total federal spending has been fairly flat, about 18% +-2% of GDP, since the 1950's, with no particular trend. Last time it spiked above (just barely above) 20% was for yet another bailout of deregulated industries. Total government spending of all kinds has never reached 50% in the U.S. except during World War II, when 42% of GDP went to the millitary.
Have you ever even read it? You'd have to repeal the 14th or the 9th, or add a specific amendment, to overturn that, because the alternative is to abandon stare decisis and strip the American people of all common-law rights.
It perhaps is not generally appreciated that the restrictive criminal abortion laws in effect in a majority of States today are of relatively recent vintage.
This issue was litigated and settled long ago, in multiple nations more Christian than ours is today and one of whose collection of settled rights are explicitly guaranteed to the people here (as in, protected from all government interference short of amendment). If the Ninth's reach doesn't include settled common-law issues, it includes nothing.
I was hooked on computers from the age of 12. In 1985 I was a systems programmer at a bank, doing mainframe networking. The only thing I knew about the Mac was the contempt it was getting from my coworkers and the trade press, and it sure didn't sound like anything I needed, maybe a dazzling toy but a toy nonetheless.
So my girlfriend and I were out that weekend bopping down Lake St and stopped into a store that had them on sale. She knew precisely nothing about computers. I watched the salesman give her maybe half a minute intro to the mouse and menus, size her up and walk away. Five minutes later, she could use MacWrite. It was all there, anybody could learn it. I was watching "discoverability" in operation before I knew the word, but I sure as hell knew what I was looking at.
Steve Jobs knew it when he saw it, too, only he knew what it was for without being told. It wasn't for the people who populate research labs. He knew it was how you get computers into everybody's life. Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, lots of people in the business sneered at just about everything Steve came up with, because he had the unutterable gall to actually know a good thing when he saw it. His faith in his own aesthetic sense was proved over and over again and the diehards never caught up. He did things that had the, erm, unfaithful, laughing at him even after seeing him operate all these years. He didn't do it once or twice, it got so he was doing it every time. Even after decades of watching him identify and hone the best, people were saying the iPad would fail, it was a gadget with no market. He was right and he knew he was right. He didn't have to give a damn what you think, and he didn't.
An "independent" study. Where have I heard this before? Hmmm. Hmm Hmmm. Oh! Here it is!
Working behind the scenes to orchestrate “independent” praise of our technology, and damnation of the enemy’s, is a key evangelism function during the Slog. “Independent” analyst’s report should be issued, praising your technology and damning the competitors (or ignoring them). “Independent” consultants should write columns and articles, give conference presentations and moderate stacked panels, all on our behalf (and setting them up as experts in the new technology, available for just $200/hour). “Independent” academic sources should be cultivated and quoted (and research money granted). “Independent” courseware providers should start profiting from their early involvement in our technology. Every possible source of leverage should be sought and turned to our advantage.
I'm guessing this study is roughly as independent as the DPRK is democratic.
Thank you, and I stand corrected. We could quibble over what 35 days should be instead -- seems to me it'd be fairer at double that, or maybe a sliding scale or something -- but, a $107K deduction? You're maintaining American citizenship and earning enough that the tax on the remainder seems extortionate to you? Look, fair or not, but: do you buy life insurance? The lucky ones (or, the careful ones who don't get spectacularly unlucky) subsidize the rest. At some point the laws and regulations have to just screw as few people as possible.
MyDefrag works _great_. It creates "zones" and you can define them yourself if you want. Plain defrag helps a little, but my stepdaughter's computer gets very, very slow after a few months and plain defrag wouldn't fix it, not even the space-consolidating kind. Most people would think that's probably malware (she's one of the ones who can't really distinguish the monitor from the computer), but mydefrag did amazing things for Orbiter's startup time so I figured what the hell. mydefrag completely fixes it, it runs like new. The tool doesn't just defrag, it gathers (and sorts, if you want) related files so cold-cache startup time for every app plummets. In fact, it seems to markedly improve responsiveness even after they're warmed up, I'm stumped for why. I put the really huge files and the deadweight at the end of the disk so very few seeks have to span them and they never have to move, songs and such in a separate swamp, there's no reason to sort them in any particular order. Caches and temp files and logs in another unordered swamp, files accessed during startup in another, the rest of the apps' files all gathered and alphabetized
Slashdot Mirror
And laws Congress writes aren't supreme right now. You might as well say things the Lieutenant tells you to do aren't orders right now. Regulations have the force of law. Agencies have the authority to write them because Congress handed them that authority, and Congress had that authority because we handed it to them. Your daddy didn't teach you this? Didn't care enough to check whether the schools did?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong
I wouldn't say "wrong" is quite the correct word.
The EFF and President Obama are vocal proponents of net neutrality, and the the EFF makes specific suggestions for how the FCC could claim, in a way that might stand up in court, legal authority to mandate it. The EFF's objection is not that the FCC lacks the authority to issue the regulations, but that the legal basis they've chosen to defend it could hardly be better calculated to torpedo any chance of exercising it. This is easily demonstrated from your own cites. From the latest of them -- it's very digestibly short, I don't understand how anyone could miss the point,
While we're big fans of net neutrality, we worry that the FCC may want to build its net neutrality regulations on a rotten legal foundation
and
it's hard to imagine a less stable legal footing than the theory that the D.C. Court of Appeals just rejected in the Comcast ruling
and
Title II would certainly provide a more stable, and narrower, basis of authority to impose open network rules, as well as other regulations familiar to telecommunications providers.
The EFF drily say they "might like" FCC regulations mandating honest traffic management and "might not like" FCC regulations pandering to moralists and middlemen.
What would you do?
Our answer will be the same.
introduce functionality knowing before hand that it has exploits
What's with the red herrings, dude? Are you really unable to spot the gaping difference between that and what I actually said?
On second thought, never mind.
"Deliberately introducing flaws": I don't know where the actual failure in their code was, but truetype rendering is done by a full virtual machine. This isn't an exaggeration. Do chase that link: that machine is not simple, not by any measure. They're firing up an arbitrary user-supplied VM image in the kernel, and yes I say that constitutes a conscious introduction of a security flaw. Nobody could possibly have thought that was safe.
True but obviously irrelevant statements "have no bearing" on the point. You might as well have said the air is cleaner now than it was then because we've had the EPA longer. It's true, but it's got nothing to do with them gratuitously importing an interpreter for an unusual, sophisticated VM into their kernel and then using that interpreter to run arbitrary VM images from userland. I gots a little clue for you: that was never, ever, ever safe, and they knew it. They did it deliberately.
Give it up. There's a difference between not being perfect and deliberately introducing flaws. Not one of your other objections has any bearing at all.
So it's ok to sell faulty armor into a war zone then.
Getting an OS to observe which threads play nice together is not new technology.
Hmm, let's see, half the price of an iMac, let's say you're talking about duplicating a 27" iMac for $900, that's a nice machine. You're going to offer that for what price? Margin has to be what, let's say you just want to live decently in Coeur d'Alene, $50K/yr might be enough, that's $3K/mo for a house and insurance and the kids' education, the odd vacation and a little nest egg. Figure your customers call you for support once a year on average, product lifetime three years. At a few hundred cheaper than the iMac you'll be building two a week and fielding about one support call a day. Not bad, there's some safety margin there and you've somehow gotten a few hundred customers for a business you run out of your home. You'll never be able to lease real estate for your business at that rate, and nobody's sued you yet. Life is good. Go for it. All you have to do is post pictures of your product next to 27" iMac and a Dell, convince about a hundred people a year that yours is the one they want, and bet your mortgage and family on it. It could work.
I see it differently.
Nice job addressing six words, pretending the rest aren't there. Care to explain how the people who design and build and grow are lazy? Or why you think the people who make their living writing and painting and singing are lazy? Or in what world anyone believes global companies aren't designed and built and grown?
There's nothing sinister about this.
Of course there's nothing sinister about the parts you're willing to discuss, but your devotion to discussing only the good parts of your model and the bad parts (even when you have to invent them) of anyone else's can convince no one but the lazy.
As I recall, the Temple of Man was built wide, and low to the ground.
Attracting income is a separate skill from creating wealth. Wealth is designed and built and grown, and the people who generate it design and build and grow. It's written and painted and sung.
There are people who can only attract income and social position. They're the ones who think it's smart to get other people to generate the wealth but keep the income for themselves. They call themselves "the productive people".
I hope that when I do watch the video, I turn out wrong and Coyne was fair and objective all the time. Otherwise he'd damage atheism more than support it.
Yeah, then, um, don't watch the video. Religion and science use language in different ways. Religion speaks implicitly, in imagery and metaphor, science explicity. Neither of those two arguments seem very likely to make it across that bridge to achieve communication, but Haught was at least clearly trying. I can't figure out who Coyne was trying to reach.
Or, as I suspect Coyne would have put it and to use language he'd apparently be more likely to understand, on the subject of religion I wouldn't engage him any more than I would a self-righteous creationist teenager, and for the same reasons.
Compilers can take advantage of model-specific instruction scheduling idiosyncracies and get major performance boosts. Why shouldn't OS's take advantage of thread-scheduling idiosyncracies for similar boosts? If AMD's chip can deliver equivalent performance cheaper, but only if your OS knows how to use it, then if your OS hasn't been taught how to do that yet, what needs fixing is your OS.
In the mid-1930's when Social Security was introduced, life expectancy for all workers was age 65 or higher. Even in 1900, the average 40-year-old would reach age 70. People who made it to age 65 in 1940 would live another 12.8 years on average. In 2006, it was 18.5 years. That's about a 45% longer payout period from 1940 to 2006. Nonfarm worker productivity from 1947 to 2007 increased by ~5500%. That isn't a typo, that's five thousand five hundred percent more productive. Assuming all workers survive to age 65 now instead of just half of them, that's a per-worker 5500% increase in production supporting a per-worker 300% increase in supported retirement (each worker who gets to age 65 lives half again as long, that's 150% the payout length; twice as many actually get there).
Total federal spending has been fairly flat, about 18% +-2% of GDP, since the 1950's, with no particular trend. Last time it spiked above (just barely above) 20% was for yet another bailout of deregulated industries. Total government spending of all kinds has never reached 50% in the U.S. except during World War II, when 42% of GDP went to the millitary.
Have you ever even read it? You'd have to repeal the 14th or the 9th, or add a specific amendment, to overturn that, because the alternative is to abandon stare decisis and strip the American people of all common-law rights.
It perhaps is not generally appreciated that the restrictive criminal abortion laws in effect in a majority of States today are of relatively recent vintage.
This issue was litigated and settled long ago, in multiple nations more Christian than ours is today and one of whose collection of settled rights are explicitly guaranteed to the people here (as in, protected from all government interference short of amendment). If the Ninth's reach doesn't include settled common-law issues, it includes nothing.
I was hooked on computers from the age of 12. In 1985 I was a systems programmer at a bank, doing mainframe networking. The only thing I knew about the Mac was the contempt it was getting from my coworkers and the trade press, and it sure didn't sound like anything I needed, maybe a dazzling toy but a toy nonetheless.
So my girlfriend and I were out that weekend bopping down Lake St and stopped into a store that had them on sale. She knew precisely nothing about computers. I watched the salesman give her maybe half a minute intro to the mouse and menus, size her up and walk away. Five minutes later, she could use MacWrite. It was all there, anybody could learn it. I was watching "discoverability" in operation before I knew the word, but I sure as hell knew what I was looking at.
Steve Jobs knew it when he saw it, too, only he knew what it was for without being told. It wasn't for the people who populate research labs. He knew it was how you get computers into everybody's life. Mac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, lots of people in the business sneered at just about everything Steve came up with, because he had the unutterable gall to actually know a good thing when he saw it. His faith in his own aesthetic sense was proved over and over again and the diehards never caught up. He did things that had the, erm, unfaithful, laughing at him even after seeing him operate all these years. He didn't do it once or twice, it got so he was doing it every time. Even after decades of watching him identify and hone the best, people were saying the iPad would fail, it was a gadget with no market. He was right and he knew he was right. He didn't have to give a damn what you think, and he didn't.
"Here's to the crazy ones."
I haven't been paying enough attention to count them any more. How many botnets have Microsoft been in on the kill for now?
Working behind the scenes to orchestrate “independent” praise of our technology, and damnation of the enemy’s, is a key evangelism function during the Slog. “Independent” analyst’s report should be issued, praising your technology and damning the competitors (or ignoring them). “Independent” consultants should write columns and articles, give conference presentations and moderate stacked panels, all on our behalf (and setting them up as experts in the new technology, available for just $200/hour). “Independent” academic sources should be cultivated and quoted (and research money granted). “Independent” courseware providers should start profiting from their early involvement in our technology. Every possible source of leverage should be sought and turned to our advantage.
I'm guessing this study is roughly as independent as the DPRK is democratic.
There's nothing wrong with a legitimately achieved and maintained monopoly.
The Microsoft antitrust suits were more about them bundling IE with their OS
Please, before repeating Microsoft's lies for them again, get the facts.
Thank you, and I stand corrected. We could quibble over what 35 days should be instead -- seems to me it'd be fairer at double that, or maybe a sliding scale or something -- but, a $107K deduction? You're maintaining American citizenship and earning enough that the tax on the remainder seems extortionate to you? Look, fair or not, but: do you buy life insurance? The lucky ones (or, the careful ones who don't get spectacularly unlucky) subsidize the rest. At some point the laws and regulations have to just screw as few people as possible.
MyDefrag works _great_. It creates "zones" and you can define them yourself if you want. Plain defrag helps a little, but my stepdaughter's computer gets very, very slow after a few months and plain defrag wouldn't fix it, not even the space-consolidating kind. Most people would think that's probably malware (she's one of the ones who can't really distinguish the monitor from the computer), but mydefrag did amazing things for Orbiter's startup time so I figured what the hell. mydefrag completely fixes it, it runs like new. The tool doesn't just defrag, it gathers (and sorts, if you want) related files so cold-cache startup time for every app plummets. In fact, it seems to markedly improve responsiveness even after they're warmed up, I'm stumped for why. I put the really huge files and the deadweight at the end of the disk so very few seeks have to span them and they never have to move, songs and such in a separate swamp, there's no reason to sort them in any particular order. Caches and temp files and logs in another unordered swamp, files accessed during startup in another, the rest of the apps' files all gathered and alphabetized
Or they could reinstitute the WPA, set people to work at things of lasting value -- you know, actual wealth.
Individuals do not pay taxes at all. All individuals do is pass their tax costs on to the price of their labor.
Same ratio of discretionary income to taxes paid.