Then you have no idea of differences between trademark, copyright, and patents... You can't trademark sound or lyric
Before correcting me on this, you might want to get an education, because you obviously lack one. Seriously. You can in fact trademark sounds. Want proof? How about a link directly to the government office that grants exactly those kinds of trademarks:
Seriously haven't you ever seen the beginning of MGM movies with the roaring lion, with the words "Trademark" written on it? Lo and behold, the roaring lion sound is trademarked. And, much more relevant to TFA, an example of a trademarked ringtone is the Nokia jingle. You'd have to be living under a rock to miss either of these, and both can be found on that page I just linked, including their relevant trademark case numbers just for the sound and nothing else.
Furthermore, look at what Monster cable has sued for. It goes WELL beyond the domain of any marks that they currently own, and I even provided examples, such as suing a miniature golf company.
I am completely aware of the differences, however it seems that you are not aware of (and thus are uneducated about) what all a trademark covers, nor are you aware of what people have sued for outside of their trademarked domain. Yet somehow I got modded troll and you got modded insightful in spite of the fact that I'm very clearly right and you're very clearly wrong, with proof to back that statement up. Slashdot's wonderful moderation at work. And yes, I'm irked at that, hence the tone of my post.
The difference, I think, would be that the US government only seizes domain names that are within its own jurisdiction. It can't/won't seize thepiratebay.se, for example, though it could seize thepiratebay.org because.org is within its jurisdiction (but oddly it hasn't.)
However if we hand domain names over to an international body, then who knows what domains they might seize. I would imagine that, for example, Europe (especially Germany) might want to seize stormfront.org, middle eastern countries would likely want to seize pornhub.com, etc. While I don't visit either site, I don't think either should be seized by anybody.
But the main point is, one of the things we've enjoyed with US governance of IANA is that every country has exclusive ownership of all of its respective TLDs, and other country's laws are notwithstanding (unless for whatever reason some other country willingly honors the laws of another country, like new zealand willingly following US laws with regard to megaupload.) Unless there's some compelling reason why this should go away, then why should it be handed over to an international body? I just don't see anything broken about the status quo.
As much as I'd like to see Snowden pardoned, I think he's probably wrong about why pardons exist. It seems to me that they originally existed as a means of nobility keeping political allies in power instead of dead or in jail. Who else would a king bother to pardon? Granted, the first high profile federal pardons in the US were for the whisky rebellion, so perhaps in the US context he might be right, but the US took the concept of pardons from the country that it rebelled from.
Their mistake was trying to trademark it in the EU. They should have done it here in the states; you can trademark just about anything here. Hell, there's a company that successfully claims ownership of the word "monster", a very common word that they claim trademark infringement on everything and anything from minigolf to movies.
Oh that's easy, just walk into a trailer park and you'll easily find some iron scrap sitting around. Sure, it's not an ingot, but who cares? It'll do what you want.
No, it's not in any worse. This is a highly uneducated comment. The "high" in high fructose corn syrup refers to the fact that it has more fructose than regular corn syrup. Sucrose and HFCS have roughly the same fructose to glucose ratio. Yes, it can and does vary, but not much, in fact in many cases HFCS is lower.
At the end of the day, the only difference between the two is sucrose has a molecular bond between the fructose and the glucose molecules, however your intestines have an enzyme that splits them apart before your body does anything at all with either, hence completely negating any difference.
And to be honest, you're one of those I refer to as uneducated. You get what I term a "whole foods" education that's designed to make you spend more on food that sounds healthier but very much is not, making you what sales and marketing people refer to as a sucker.
I grew up in the 80's, and I remember quite clearly the anti-smoking ads on TV, newspapers, radio, billboards...everywhere. And then there was DARE (drug focused, but also covered cigarettes) and plenty of education in schools about just what exactly smoking does to you. From what I understand, the 70's wasn't much different. And yet in spite of that, in spite of the constant education being thrown at you, I still knew people who started smoking anyways. Why? Because in spite of their education, they just didn't give a fuck. Hell, one of my cousins and I used to talk about how dumb it was, but then he started smoking because "it's something to do when you're with your friends"...uh...WHAT?
If you're younger than 40 and you smoke...well...you're just a bonehead. In spite of all of the social justice nonsense about trying to push the blame for people's problems on to some rich dude, corporations, the government, etc, there's a reality that many find inconvenient, but they know it anyways: Some people are dumber than others. The constitution might say that we're all equal, and by the letter of the law that may very well be the case, but biologically it just aint so.
This goes back a lot further than that, long before there was ever a sugar industry to begin with. It's not just in things we make, sugar in all of its forms isn't exactly healthy, and the thing is, we've been selectively breeding our food (especially fruit) to be higher in sugar content for several millennia. I personally can't think of any food in its natural form that's as sugary as we've made it. (Also, for this same reason, the whole frutarian movement is a big fat joke based on something that I wouldn't even like to call junk science because it's not science at all.) Sugar is in more than that too. Honey, milk, rice...
The fact is, sugar is addictive, and that's why we like it. But what it does to your body is actually quite similar to the effects of alcohol (Chiefly because of fructose though, and btw, HFCS is no better or worse than sucrose -- they're essentially the same damn thing, and people who attack HFCS while treating other sugars as benign are idiots.) Alcohol also being addictive, which is why we like it, but few people actually like the taste of alcohol.
Intel even stated a few years ago that a given CPU can have 2 of 3 things:
- Speed - Energy efficiency - Low power consumption
It cannot however have all three of those in the same chip, i.e. a very fast chip cannot scale down based on the demand to meet the needs of mobile devices. The whole x86 architecture is pretty much entirely engineered for speed, and a few months ago Intel finally conceded that they just can't make Atom chips compete with ARM. If there is a "surface phone", then it's not going to run x86 apps locally, unless it's either slow as shit or has shitty battery life.
Windows phones aren't that bad either if you aren't a teenager who needs all the latest apps, or a hacker hackity hacking roots away.
I have a windows phone sitting in a drawer that I bought as a backup phone because it was super cheap. Anyways here's why I think it sucks:
Flat UI is totally shit. Many people think flat UI just means a clean, easily scalable interface, but that's false. Flat UI means you can't offer any hints of three dimensional depth. So no gradients, no shadows, no overlapping objects. This means that skeumorph is basically impossible. Too much skeumorph (i.e. the heavily bitmapped crap Apple recently did away with that scales like shit and ages worse) is bad, but no skeumorph at all is worse. The purpose of skeumorph is to make UI elements look recognizable as everyday objects you deal with in the real world so that you can intuitively determine what they're supposed to do. Windows phone (and windows 10) just discarded this concept entirely. And also since you have no depth, the only way you can distinguish objects is make them have sharply contrasting colors, which contributes to an ugly fisher-price look.
This is why, in my opinion, Material Design is by far the best smartphone design language by a mile: It remains simplistic while still retaining light skeumorph, scalability, and you can use practically any color palette you want.
And speak of colors, on windows phone, when you need to find an app that you don't have pinned, it's easily the worst experience of any smartphone OS. Why? Because you have to scroll down a big long list of names with icons that mostly look identical. In many cases, when recently got a new app and haven't used it for say, a week, you might not remember the exact name, but you might remember what its icon looked like, especially if you're a visual learner. However on windows phone, that won't help you a whole lot. The whole fucking UI is one big doldrum.
Oh but wait, the common windows phone fan argument is that static icons look bland, and that windows phones tiles are innovative and unparalleled...except they're none of the above. Let's do a little comparing and contrasting of Android widgets: - Android widgets can update in real-time. - WP "live" tiles can only update once every 30 minutes by default, and the shortest interval is every 15 minutes unless you create a website that constantly pushes new data to it (i.e. it can't be done locally by an app) and even then the shortest interval is one minute. - Android widgets, like a calendar widget, can be configured in practically any dimension. This means they can become a big vertical list, which means something like a calendar widget can show multiple events in succession. - WP tiles have limited dimension and by design only show one object at a time, and flip at an interval that you can't control, so you can easily miss something, like say you could have an appointment shortly but it's showing the next event after that. This also can become annoying to people who might have forgotten what app the tile is for. - Android widgets are fully interactive. This means that, like a calendar widget for example, can be scrolled, and you can tap the calendar event to directly open that event in the app. Some widgets obviate the need to open the app at all, take for example Google's "what's this song?" widget. - WP tiles don't do anything other than flip, and tapping them just opens the app. That's it, they can't do anything else. If you want to navigate to a specific email, voicemail, text, calendar event, etc, tapping that event while its showing on the tile doesn't open that item, it just opens the app.
Another major annoyance with windows phone is it's downright awful at multitasking. Try for example, to browse a webpage while your maps app downloads offline data. Oh wait, you can't. As soon as you switch to the browser, the download stops. In Windows Phone, Microsoft's philosophy is that paint shouldn't dry unless you sit there and watch it dr
Microsoft still thinks it's 2001 where if you throw enough money into a market, no matter how saturated it is, then you can suddenly have decent mindshare. So, they went and sunk $20+ billion into windows phone and got nothing in return.
I don't think crime is a result of being poor, rather it just goes along with it. For an analogy, compare the birth rates of poor people against that of wealthier people. Even though the wealthier can afford more kids, they're smart enough to not have so many. Poor people tend to smoke more compared to wealthier people, and you have to be pretty fucking dumb to start smoking these days given that for the last 40 years it's basically impossible to have grown up without hearing about just how bad smoking actually is, not to mention how costly it is.
There isn't any economic or societal pressure to "make" them do these things, in spite of what some people claim, it's just plain making stupid fucking choices, and I've seen plenty of people born into wealthy families end up poor when they're on their own because they make stupid fucking choices. Some people are naive enough to think that if you give poor people free money that they'll have less kids, abuse drugs less, and commit fewer crimes, and that poverty can be solved by just throwing money at it, but it's just that: Naive. If you give them free money, they'll just buy a new TV and switch from a pack a day to two packs a day.
Anyways...it's interesting to note the difference in behaviors between poor white people and poor black people. Poor black people tend to live in inner city projects, and poor white people tend to live in trailers. Poor black people tend to commit more crimes against other people (i.e. robbery, assault, vandalism) and poor white people tend to commit "victimless" crimes (i.e. moonshiners, drugs, prostitution.) That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the crimes that white people commit are just noticed less because nobody is exactly going to call the police and report that they just had sex with a prostitute.
I've been having my oil changed at walmart for years and have yet to ever have anything like that happen. Besides, since when does anybody who changes your oil not work for minimum wage?
Same reason I get my oil changes at walmart. Pay a little more but don't have to deal with some twat telling you that you need extra work that you don't actually need. The worst walmart does is try to sell you an air filter or some kind of engine cleaning fluid when you don't need either, but saying no once is enough.
We still live in a world where mining isn't done by robots, and it probably won't be by the time any of this comes to fruition. Maybe, who knows. The best we can do at this point is speculate.
Statement not supported by facts [torquenews.com].
Perhaps read my comment and re-read your article. Your article talks about maintenance costs being basically the same. My comment talks about time concerns. These are not the same thing.
Except that you are stranded for hours while your piece of shit electric recharges.
I'll be sure to remember that next time it charges in the garage overnight. Oh wait, you mean you expect me to drive out to BFE all the time? Guess what, I almost never go there, and when I do, I have a truck that is much better suited for offroad than a commuter vehicle.
This is like the shitty argument Verizon uses "oh but our service is worth twice as much because it often works in bumble fuck egypt, even though you probably never actually go to bumble fuck egypt to begin with."
Riiight, and if you need a part for your Chevy here is some iron ore, you CAN smelt iron...right?
Well, an iron ingot is easier to obtain than ore, and obtaining a programming book and learning to hack the kernel is easier and cheaper than obtaining an iron ingot, a machine shop, and learning how to use machining/milling tools.
But that's besides the point. The point is that for IT shops, you can always pay somebody to write a patch for your dated Linux systems, which your existing IT staff can then mass deploy. However if your windows systems go out of support, it's time to buy new computers, servers, etc.
You know why I want an electric car? It's all about time.
- I can drive on the HOV lane and reduce my commute time by half. - Maintenance required is dramatically reduced (i.e. no oil changes.) - No more weekly trip to the gas station (I couldn't care less about the $30 it costs to fill my tank; I make that much money in a very short amount of time.)
Still, a tesla model S is beyond my price range, and I'm presently saving the cash to buy a house during the next financial and real-estate collapse (which I'm predicting is going to hit sometime in the range of late 2017 and early 2018) so I'm not going to dispose of it on a car.
GP is just overly sheltered to be honest, and kind of lacks perspective.
The perils described don't really sound that different from mining in ages past. Consider, for example, how dangerous nitroglycerine is to handle; so dangerous that most people refused to handle it. And yet it was basically all that was available for use in mining operations for a very long time, and mining remained profitable and continued anyways because people would handle it if the pay was right. And among other things, the job was often out in remote areas, so indeed the workers were quite isolated, cave-ins were a very real risk, and work shifts were so deep underground that it might be days before you see daylight, and there was so much soot and dirt in the air that your lungs would age very quickly.
But again, people would do this anyways because it paid a lot more than any other work they could have done.
With all of this talk about automation taking over jobs, and if that does result in economic hardship, you'll have an easier time getting people to do dangerous off-planet work than you might realize.
Wikipedia can be good for looking up things about natural sciences like biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, etc, but for anything else it's often missing information, sometimes deliberately, and in cases where a page manages to not get deleted, it's heavily biased and one sided. Case in point:
In fact it's almost a miracle that the page even exists as it has met wikipedia's notability standards for years, yet it is often deleted and blocked from being reposted. And then in the talk page an admin complains that it doesn't have enough content (gee, I wonder how that happened?) hinting that it could get deleted.
It's a common misconception that CDMA is only used on Verizon and Sprint; practically all GSM carriers use a combination of three modulation schemes (and three radios), those being TDMA (aka 2g), CDMA (aka 3g), and OFDMA (aka 4g). GSM carriers have been using TDMA and CDMA for decades, though they used TDMA for voice and CDMA for data (TDMA efficiency is bad akin to old token-ring networks) hence a few years back, having two radios meant only GSM phones could do both voice and data simultaneously. The main difference is that GSM uses W-CDMA whereas Sprint/Verizon use CDMA2000, both of which are for the most part qualcomm tech.
That said, you can't go without CDMA unless you're basically totally blanketed in LTE, as GSM carriers do not use CDMA for voice.
I think GP is one of those who think that the government is the only one that can do things right. If so, he might want to read the Rogers Commission Report.
I'm fine with people not allowing blacks to stay in their house while offering a commercial short term house / room letting service.
But I don't think society should support their commercial venture if they're going to be racist about it.
The upshot is that you're welcome to be racially discriminatory in who you allow to stay in your property, or to run a commercial short-term letting service, but not both.
Well consider that with the situation of having a roommate live with you, that is essentially a commercial venture because they're helping you pay either your rent or your mortgage, so it's income in a sense, and that's even longer term than the airbnb situation. Now, the law doesn't permit you to post an ad saying "no blacks" or any other protected status (except for sex, of which you're only allowed to restrict it to the same sex as yourself, but in spite of that it's actually quite common that men AND women post ads saying no men in ads for roommates -- so if you're a male, even a white male, you're already at a disadvantage here.)
However in spite of the laws against posting a discriminatory ad, when it comes to accepting who you want to live with you, you are allowed to reject just anybody you want for any reason you want, up to and including the person's race or gender. This actually came down to a supreme court case once (I don't recall the name) where the decision was made that the government can't and shouldn't dictate who you have to i.e. share your kitchen and your bathroom with.
And personally, if I was in the situation where I needed a roommate, my rules would look like this:
Absolutely no males under 40. White females would be ok provided they don't have any hints of narcissism when I talk to them. No black females unless they have a professional career and they're already making >50k/year, or are over 40, or have a military background. No black males unless they are over 40 AND have one of the following: A military background, or a professional career making >50k/year.
Some people might call that racist, but consider this: I can be good friends with anybody described above, and am in many cases, but I just don't want to put up with the kind of party crap they might do during my quiet times.
Slashdot Mirror
Then you have no idea of differences between trademark, copyright, and patents... You can't trademark sound or lyric
Before correcting me on this, you might want to get an education, because you obviously lack one. Seriously. You can in fact trademark sounds. Want proof? How about a link directly to the government office that grants exactly those kinds of trademarks:
http://www.uspto.gov/trademark...
Seriously haven't you ever seen the beginning of MGM movies with the roaring lion, with the words "Trademark" written on it? Lo and behold, the roaring lion sound is trademarked. And, much more relevant to TFA, an example of a trademarked ringtone is the Nokia jingle. You'd have to be living under a rock to miss either of these, and both can be found on that page I just linked, including their relevant trademark case numbers just for the sound and nothing else.
Furthermore, look at what Monster cable has sued for. It goes WELL beyond the domain of any marks that they currently own, and I even provided examples, such as suing a miniature golf company.
http://gizmodo.com/393365/mons...
I am completely aware of the differences, however it seems that you are not aware of (and thus are uneducated about) what all a trademark covers, nor are you aware of what people have sued for outside of their trademarked domain. Yet somehow I got modded troll and you got modded insightful in spite of the fact that I'm very clearly right and you're very clearly wrong, with proof to back that statement up. Slashdot's wonderful moderation at work. And yes, I'm irked at that, hence the tone of my post.
The difference, I think, would be that the US government only seizes domain names that are within its own jurisdiction. It can't/won't seize thepiratebay.se, for example, though it could seize thepiratebay.org because .org is within its jurisdiction (but oddly it hasn't.)
However if we hand domain names over to an international body, then who knows what domains they might seize. I would imagine that, for example, Europe (especially Germany) might want to seize stormfront.org, middle eastern countries would likely want to seize pornhub.com, etc. While I don't visit either site, I don't think either should be seized by anybody.
But the main point is, one of the things we've enjoyed with US governance of IANA is that every country has exclusive ownership of all of its respective TLDs, and other country's laws are notwithstanding (unless for whatever reason some other country willingly honors the laws of another country, like new zealand willingly following US laws with regard to megaupload.) Unless there's some compelling reason why this should go away, then why should it be handed over to an international body? I just don't see anything broken about the status quo.
As much as I'd like to see Snowden pardoned, I think he's probably wrong about why pardons exist. It seems to me that they originally existed as a means of nobility keeping political allies in power instead of dead or in jail. Who else would a king bother to pardon? Granted, the first high profile federal pardons in the US were for the whisky rebellion, so perhaps in the US context he might be right, but the US took the concept of pardons from the country that it rebelled from.
Their mistake was trying to trademark it in the EU. They should have done it here in the states; you can trademark just about anything here. Hell, there's a company that successfully claims ownership of the word "monster", a very common word that they claim trademark infringement on everything and anything from minigolf to movies.
Oh that's easy, just walk into a trailer park and you'll easily find some iron scrap sitting around. Sure, it's not an ingot, but who cares? It'll do what you want.
No, it's not in any worse. This is a highly uneducated comment. The "high" in high fructose corn syrup refers to the fact that it has more fructose than regular corn syrup. Sucrose and HFCS have roughly the same fructose to glucose ratio. Yes, it can and does vary, but not much, in fact in many cases HFCS is lower.
At the end of the day, the only difference between the two is sucrose has a molecular bond between the fructose and the glucose molecules, however your intestines have an enzyme that splits them apart before your body does anything at all with either, hence completely negating any difference.
And to be honest, you're one of those I refer to as uneducated. You get what I term a "whole foods" education that's designed to make you spend more on food that sounds healthier but very much is not, making you what sales and marketing people refer to as a sucker.
I grew up in the 80's, and I remember quite clearly the anti-smoking ads on TV, newspapers, radio, billboards...everywhere. And then there was DARE (drug focused, but also covered cigarettes) and plenty of education in schools about just what exactly smoking does to you. From what I understand, the 70's wasn't much different. And yet in spite of that, in spite of the constant education being thrown at you, I still knew people who started smoking anyways. Why? Because in spite of their education, they just didn't give a fuck. Hell, one of my cousins and I used to talk about how dumb it was, but then he started smoking because "it's something to do when you're with your friends"...uh...WHAT?
If you're younger than 40 and you smoke...well...you're just a bonehead. In spite of all of the social justice nonsense about trying to push the blame for people's problems on to some rich dude, corporations, the government, etc, there's a reality that many find inconvenient, but they know it anyways: Some people are dumber than others. The constitution might say that we're all equal, and by the letter of the law that may very well be the case, but biologically it just aint so.
This goes back a lot further than that, long before there was ever a sugar industry to begin with. It's not just in things we make, sugar in all of its forms isn't exactly healthy, and the thing is, we've been selectively breeding our food (especially fruit) to be higher in sugar content for several millennia. I personally can't think of any food in its natural form that's as sugary as we've made it. (Also, for this same reason, the whole frutarian movement is a big fat joke based on something that I wouldn't even like to call junk science because it's not science at all.) Sugar is in more than that too. Honey, milk, rice...
The fact is, sugar is addictive, and that's why we like it. But what it does to your body is actually quite similar to the effects of alcohol (Chiefly because of fructose though, and btw, HFCS is no better or worse than sucrose -- they're essentially the same damn thing, and people who attack HFCS while treating other sugars as benign are idiots.) Alcohol also being addictive, which is why we like it, but few people actually like the taste of alcohol.
Intel even stated a few years ago that a given CPU can have 2 of 3 things:
- Speed
- Energy efficiency
- Low power consumption
It cannot however have all three of those in the same chip, i.e. a very fast chip cannot scale down based on the demand to meet the needs of mobile devices. The whole x86 architecture is pretty much entirely engineered for speed, and a few months ago Intel finally conceded that they just can't make Atom chips compete with ARM. If there is a "surface phone", then it's not going to run x86 apps locally, unless it's either slow as shit or has shitty battery life.
Windows phones aren't that bad either if you aren't a teenager who needs all the latest apps, or a hacker hackity hacking roots away.
I have a windows phone sitting in a drawer that I bought as a backup phone because it was super cheap. Anyways here's why I think it sucks:
Flat UI is totally shit. Many people think flat UI just means a clean, easily scalable interface, but that's false. Flat UI means you can't offer any hints of three dimensional depth. So no gradients, no shadows, no overlapping objects. This means that skeumorph is basically impossible. Too much skeumorph (i.e. the heavily bitmapped crap Apple recently did away with that scales like shit and ages worse) is bad, but no skeumorph at all is worse. The purpose of skeumorph is to make UI elements look recognizable as everyday objects you deal with in the real world so that you can intuitively determine what they're supposed to do. Windows phone (and windows 10) just discarded this concept entirely. And also since you have no depth, the only way you can distinguish objects is make them have sharply contrasting colors, which contributes to an ugly fisher-price look.
This is why, in my opinion, Material Design is by far the best smartphone design language by a mile: It remains simplistic while still retaining light skeumorph, scalability, and you can use practically any color palette you want.
And speak of colors, on windows phone, when you need to find an app that you don't have pinned, it's easily the worst experience of any smartphone OS. Why? Because you have to scroll down a big long list of names with icons that mostly look identical. In many cases, when recently got a new app and haven't used it for say, a week, you might not remember the exact name, but you might remember what its icon looked like, especially if you're a visual learner. However on windows phone, that won't help you a whole lot. The whole fucking UI is one big doldrum.
Oh but wait, the common windows phone fan argument is that static icons look bland, and that windows phones tiles are innovative and unparalleled...except they're none of the above. Let's do a little comparing and contrasting of Android widgets:
- Android widgets can update in real-time.
- WP "live" tiles can only update once every 30 minutes by default, and the shortest interval is every 15 minutes unless you create a website that constantly pushes new data to it (i.e. it can't be done locally by an app) and even then the shortest interval is one minute.
- Android widgets, like a calendar widget, can be configured in practically any dimension. This means they can become a big vertical list, which means something like a calendar widget can show multiple events in succession.
- WP tiles have limited dimension and by design only show one object at a time, and flip at an interval that you can't control, so you can easily miss something, like say you could have an appointment shortly but it's showing the next event after that. This also can become annoying to people who might have forgotten what app the tile is for.
- Android widgets are fully interactive. This means that, like a calendar widget for example, can be scrolled, and you can tap the calendar event to directly open that event in the app. Some widgets obviate the need to open the app at all, take for example Google's "what's this song?" widget.
- WP tiles don't do anything other than flip, and tapping them just opens the app. That's it, they can't do anything else. If you want to navigate to a specific email, voicemail, text, calendar event, etc, tapping that event while its showing on the tile doesn't open that item, it just opens the app.
Another major annoyance with windows phone is it's downright awful at multitasking. Try for example, to browse a webpage while your maps app downloads offline data. Oh wait, you can't. As soon as you switch to the browser, the download stops. In Windows Phone, Microsoft's philosophy is that paint shouldn't dry unless you sit there and watch it dr
Microsoft still thinks it's 2001 where if you throw enough money into a market, no matter how saturated it is, then you can suddenly have decent mindshare. So, they went and sunk $20+ billion into windows phone and got nothing in return.
I don't think crime is a result of being poor, rather it just goes along with it. For an analogy, compare the birth rates of poor people against that of wealthier people. Even though the wealthier can afford more kids, they're smart enough to not have so many. Poor people tend to smoke more compared to wealthier people, and you have to be pretty fucking dumb to start smoking these days given that for the last 40 years it's basically impossible to have grown up without hearing about just how bad smoking actually is, not to mention how costly it is.
There isn't any economic or societal pressure to "make" them do these things, in spite of what some people claim, it's just plain making stupid fucking choices, and I've seen plenty of people born into wealthy families end up poor when they're on their own because they make stupid fucking choices. Some people are naive enough to think that if you give poor people free money that they'll have less kids, abuse drugs less, and commit fewer crimes, and that poverty can be solved by just throwing money at it, but it's just that: Naive. If you give them free money, they'll just buy a new TV and switch from a pack a day to two packs a day.
Anyways...it's interesting to note the difference in behaviors between poor white people and poor black people. Poor black people tend to live in inner city projects, and poor white people tend to live in trailers. Poor black people tend to commit more crimes against other people (i.e. robbery, assault, vandalism) and poor white people tend to commit "victimless" crimes (i.e. moonshiners, drugs, prostitution.) That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the crimes that white people commit are just noticed less because nobody is exactly going to call the police and report that they just had sex with a prostitute.
To win the $500 jackpot? Here's a better idea:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I've been having my oil changed at walmart for years and have yet to ever have anything like that happen. Besides, since when does anybody who changes your oil not work for minimum wage?
Same reason I get my oil changes at walmart. Pay a little more but don't have to deal with some twat telling you that you need extra work that you don't actually need. The worst walmart does is try to sell you an air filter or some kind of engine cleaning fluid when you don't need either, but saying no once is enough.
We still live in a world where mining isn't done by robots, and it probably won't be by the time any of this comes to fruition. Maybe, who knows. The best we can do at this point is speculate.
Statement not supported by facts [torquenews.com].
Perhaps read my comment and re-read your article. Your article talks about maintenance costs being basically the same. My comment talks about time concerns. These are not the same thing.
Except that you are stranded for hours while your piece of shit electric recharges.
I'll be sure to remember that next time it charges in the garage overnight. Oh wait, you mean you expect me to drive out to BFE all the time? Guess what, I almost never go there, and when I do, I have a truck that is much better suited for offroad than a commuter vehicle.
This is like the shitty argument Verizon uses "oh but our service is worth twice as much because it often works in bumble fuck egypt, even though you probably never actually go to bumble fuck egypt to begin with."
Riiight, and if you need a part for your Chevy here is some iron ore, you CAN smelt iron...right?
Well, an iron ingot is easier to obtain than ore, and obtaining a programming book and learning to hack the kernel is easier and cheaper than obtaining an iron ingot, a machine shop, and learning how to use machining/milling tools.
But that's besides the point. The point is that for IT shops, you can always pay somebody to write a patch for your dated Linux systems, which your existing IT staff can then mass deploy. However if your windows systems go out of support, it's time to buy new computers, servers, etc.
It won't stop me from eating tuna (and I'm not a republican.)
You know why I want an electric car? It's all about time.
- I can drive on the HOV lane and reduce my commute time by half.
- Maintenance required is dramatically reduced (i.e. no oil changes.)
- No more weekly trip to the gas station (I couldn't care less about the $30 it costs to fill my tank; I make that much money in a very short amount of time.)
Still, a tesla model S is beyond my price range, and I'm presently saving the cash to buy a house during the next financial and real-estate collapse (which I'm predicting is going to hit sometime in the range of late 2017 and early 2018) so I'm not going to dispose of it on a car.
GP is just overly sheltered to be honest, and kind of lacks perspective.
The perils described don't really sound that different from mining in ages past. Consider, for example, how dangerous nitroglycerine is to handle; so dangerous that most people refused to handle it. And yet it was basically all that was available for use in mining operations for a very long time, and mining remained profitable and continued anyways because people would handle it if the pay was right. And among other things, the job was often out in remote areas, so indeed the workers were quite isolated, cave-ins were a very real risk, and work shifts were so deep underground that it might be days before you see daylight, and there was so much soot and dirt in the air that your lungs would age very quickly.
But again, people would do this anyways because it paid a lot more than any other work they could have done.
With all of this talk about automation taking over jobs, and if that does result in economic hardship, you'll have an easier time getting people to do dangerous off-planet work than you might realize.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Wikipedia can be good for looking up things about natural sciences like biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, etc, but for anything else it's often missing information, sometimes deliberately, and in cases where a page manages to not get deleted, it's heavily biased and one sided. Case in point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
In fact it's almost a miracle that the page even exists as it has met wikipedia's notability standards for years, yet it is often deleted and blocked from being reposted. And then in the talk page an admin complains that it doesn't have enough content (gee, I wonder how that happened?) hinting that it could get deleted.
Disclaimer: I'm not part of the MGTOW movement.
It's a common misconception that CDMA is only used on Verizon and Sprint; practically all GSM carriers use a combination of three modulation schemes (and three radios), those being TDMA (aka 2g), CDMA (aka 3g), and OFDMA (aka 4g). GSM carriers have been using TDMA and CDMA for decades, though they used TDMA for voice and CDMA for data (TDMA efficiency is bad akin to old token-ring networks) hence a few years back, having two radios meant only GSM phones could do both voice and data simultaneously. The main difference is that GSM uses W-CDMA whereas Sprint/Verizon use CDMA2000, both of which are for the most part qualcomm tech.
That said, you can't go without CDMA unless you're basically totally blanketed in LTE, as GSM carriers do not use CDMA for voice.
I think GP is one of those who think that the government is the only one that can do things right. If so, he might want to read the Rogers Commission Report.
I'm fine with people not allowing blacks to stay in their house while offering a commercial short term house / room letting service.
But I don't think society should support their commercial venture if they're going to be racist about it.
The upshot is that you're welcome to be racially discriminatory in who you allow to stay in your property, or to run a commercial short-term letting service, but not both.
Well consider that with the situation of having a roommate live with you, that is essentially a commercial venture because they're helping you pay either your rent or your mortgage, so it's income in a sense, and that's even longer term than the airbnb situation. Now, the law doesn't permit you to post an ad saying "no blacks" or any other protected status (except for sex, of which you're only allowed to restrict it to the same sex as yourself, but in spite of that it's actually quite common that men AND women post ads saying no men in ads for roommates -- so if you're a male, even a white male, you're already at a disadvantage here.)
However in spite of the laws against posting a discriminatory ad, when it comes to accepting who you want to live with you, you are allowed to reject just anybody you want for any reason you want, up to and including the person's race or gender. This actually came down to a supreme court case once (I don't recall the name) where the decision was made that the government can't and shouldn't dictate who you have to i.e. share your kitchen and your bathroom with.
And personally, if I was in the situation where I needed a roommate, my rules would look like this:
Absolutely no males under 40. White females would be ok provided they don't have any hints of narcissism when I talk to them. No black females unless they have a professional career and they're already making >50k/year, or are over 40, or have a military background. No black males unless they are over 40 AND have one of the following: A military background, or a professional career making >50k/year.
Some people might call that racist, but consider this: I can be good friends with anybody described above, and am in many cases, but I just don't want to put up with the kind of party crap they might do during my quiet times.