Alternate modes (e.g., HDMI) are optional, so you shouldn't expect a display connection to work over USB-C. Power delivery is not optional, but your connection may simply not supply enough power.
It looks like everything performs and interoperates according to spec. It seems like a bonus that when you buy premium hardware with proprietary features, it performs even better.
All civilizations are hierarchical because it is necessary to organize people who do not know one another.
Western corporations do that every day, and some of them are bigger than countries. Nevertheless, employment usually remains voluntary and doesn't involve any threat of imprisonment or deadly force.
The problem with government isn't that it is hierarchical, it is that it is authoritarian and involuntary.
Most of the socialist contingent was purged in the Night of Long Knives, though. After that, the party was firmly in favor of capitalist corporate entities supported by a fascist state.
Socialists like to describe any economic system that differs from theirs as "capitalist". But the words they choose do not define reality. In reality, the fascist economic system is similar to socialism; it most certainly was not what conservatives advocate when they advocate "capitalism", namely free markets.
You have to seperate the issues: on economic issues you're right, the US has only very rightwing and right extremists.
The US ranks in 18th place on the index of economic freedom, behind many European nations, including the UK. The US spends more per capita on social welfare and spends more per capita on single payer, government healthcare, retirement, and education that many European nations. In what sense is it "very rightwing and right extremist"?
The American "spectrum" consists of two parties: Democrats and Republicans. The Democrats used to be "European soft-right" because they used to support free markets. That went out the window some time in the 2000's. The Democrats are now fully for government control of both the economy and personal lives, placing them pretty far left by European standards. As for Republicans, they are roughly a non-religious version of European Christian democrats.
In August 2014 the Jay report concluded that an estimated 1,400 children, most of them white girls,[24] had been sexually abused in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013 by predominantly British-Pakistani men.... The failure to address the abuse was attributed to a combination of factors revolving around race, class and gender—contemptuous and sexist attitudes toward the mostly working-class victims; fear that the perpetrators' ethnicity would trigger allegations of racism and damage community relations; the Labour council's reluctance to challenge a Labour-voting ethnic minority; lack of a child-centred focus; a desire to protect the town's reputation; and lack of training and resources.
The problem isn't a lack of mandatory government IDs online, the problem is an abject failure of Britain's government and governing elites to protect children from rape.
Furthermore, if mandatory IDs online had been used, these horrific abuses would never have come to light because even more people would have been carted off to jail for "causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety."
Good grief, man, are you schizophrenic? As a free market guy, I at least recognize each of those items for the colossal waste of government spending that they are and for the massive negative consequences that they had. But you often argue against the consequences of those programs, yet simultaneously you still like the spending? Progressives and leftists: "all government spending is good, but crony capitalism and subsidies of things we morally disapprove of are bad!"
[A] great many investors are desperate to see Tesla's stock reach a much lower price soon, or they'll be forced to buy it at its present price in order to fulfill their short positions, potentially bankrupting many of them
The reasoning behind the belief that Tesla is going to crash and burn is pretty solid: the company has been dependent on political favors for its success, it keeps generating losses, it has no significant technology advantage, Tesla's CEO is distracted by all sorts of other crap, it keeps generating bad press, and it's a luxury fashion statement for progressive wealthy elites.
Tesla's most likely fate seems to be to be as a luxury division of one of the big auto makers, the only question is whether it will be acquired at a premium or at a going-out-of-business sale. Having said that, short selling Tesla is still a bad strategy because it can take another decade for Tesla's fate to be decided. Short term, buying Tesla may still be a good investment, even if you don't believe in its product or long term corporate strategy.
Interesting company she keeps.. It's not just the Clintons, but also other Washington power brokers, Republicans and Democrats alike. These politicians publicly denounce crony capitalism and nepotism, and privately are huge beneficiaries and promoters of it. And you can bet that every single one of her board members and political cronies made off like a bandit in her fraud. When these politicians tell you that the system is rigged, they are speaking the truth; what they don't tell you is that the very people who claim they want to fix it are the ones who are rigging it in the first place.
And pollsters wonder why voters reject both the Democratic and the Republican establishment.
If we can afford to spend $21 million on a single bomb to drop on Afghanistan to inaugurate President Trump [newyorker.com] we can spend some money on basic research
If voluntary donors can spend a billion dollars in a failed attempt to get a corrupt senator elected president of the United States, then voluntary donors can spend some money on basic research; no need to forcibly extract the money from taxpayers.
Kamala should add cold fusion to the bill too, because we really need alternative energy! That's how progressives create progress: they write a bill, pour hundreds of billions of money into the hands of corporations, and then magically progress happens! Just look at history, it's how the automobile, the integrated circuit, the telephone, the light bulb, the laser printer, and digital cameras were created! Progressive science policy FTW!
I'm glad you recognize that the inflation-adjusted total is $1.32 trillion. But that underestimates the true cost, because that money would have grown at 5-7% above inflation per year even if just invested in a market average. But to show that NASA spending generated trillions of wealth you have to show that the benefits outweighed other, easily realizable opportunities, not just that it generated more money than spent in constant dollars (of course, you haven't even demonstrated that).
For another thing, Fox News is the mainest of mainstream news and they did nothing but criticize Obama during that time (and they continue to do so) and they have done very well for themselves.
Prior to the Internet, information was a very valuable commodity. US administrations used valuable information to bribe media in exchange for favorable coverage; that's what companies like CNN and NBC became wealthy and powerful. Starting about 20 years ago, information became less valuable and other business models became competitive; FOX was one of the first to discover that.
Is that what you were talking about?
His explanation is still valid: the relics at the NYT and AP don't know any better than to sell themselves out for information; that's why they continue to operate under the old model. That's also why they liked Obama: Obama still tried to maintain the old model in which a progressive intelligentsia composed of career politicians, intellectuals, and journalists set the agenda and profit handsomely from it. I think Obama will be the last gasp of that model; he only got elected because McCain was an even worse establishment candidate.
I don't know if Trump counts as the powers that be, but there are mainstream journalists who have been critical of him and are also doing well.
Trump was always antagonistic to the media, and he never bribed news media with valuable information. That's why the traditional media hated him so much: their cozy, corrupt relationship with past administrations was over.
no, the tech alone from space exploration has made trillions in wealth and saved lives. fantastic investment
Not a particularly good "investment", given that we spent several trillion dollars on NASA since 1958.
Imagine how many more trillions of dollars we would have gotten in wealth if the money had actually been used by a competent, less corrupt, and more efficient organization than NASA.
spending on increasing scientific knowledge and advancing engineering is not a wrong.
No, but taking money forcibly to do it is. So is using that money not to advance knowledge, but to pay off politically connected corporations and groups.
In any case, NASA has a horrible return on investment when it comes to "scientific knowledge and advanced engineering". NASA has been overall a net negative when it comes to space exploration: we'd be further along with space exploration without NASA.
Did I say I "trust" them? Like all reviews, you need to use your head in figuring out whether they are fake or real, and if they are real, what they are actually saying.
People keep coming up with this idea, and it keeps making no sense: you pay a premium for a second display surface that is mostly going to display an image of a keyboard but actually is much harder to type on than a real keyboard.
Slashdot Mirror
Alternate modes (e.g., HDMI) are optional, so you shouldn't expect a display connection to work over USB-C. Power delivery is not optional, but your connection may simply not supply enough power.
It looks like everything performs and interoperates according to spec. It seems like a bonus that when you buy premium hardware with proprietary features, it performs even better.
Western corporations do that every day, and some of them are bigger than countries. Nevertheless, employment usually remains voluntary and doesn't involve any threat of imprisonment or deadly force.
The problem with government isn't that it is hierarchical, it is that it is authoritarian and involuntary.
Socialists like to describe any economic system that differs from theirs as "capitalist". But the words they choose do not define reality. In reality, the fascist economic system is similar to socialism; it most certainly was not what conservatives advocate when they advocate "capitalism", namely free markets.
And how is that different from any other "socialist" party?
The US ranks in 18th place on the index of economic freedom, behind many European nations, including the UK. The US spends more per capita on social welfare and spends more per capita on single payer, government healthcare, retirement, and education that many European nations. In what sense is it "very rightwing and right extremist"?
Statism has been an integral part of both the European left and the European right. There are no significant non-statist parties in most of Europe.
The American "spectrum" consists of two parties: Democrats and Republicans. The Democrats used to be "European soft-right" because they used to support free markets. That went out the window some time in the 2000's. The Democrats are now fully for government control of both the economy and personal lives, placing them pretty far left by European standards. As for Republicans, they are roughly a non-religious version of European Christian democrats.
This is where "grooming" happens in the UK:
The problem isn't a lack of mandatory government IDs online, the problem is an abject failure of Britain's government and governing elites to protect children from rape.
Furthermore, if mandatory IDs online had been used, these horrific abuses would never have come to light because even more people would have been carted off to jail for "causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety."
Good grief, man, are you schizophrenic? As a free market guy, I at least recognize each of those items for the colossal waste of government spending that they are and for the massive negative consequences that they had. But you often argue against the consequences of those programs, yet simultaneously you still like the spending? Progressives and leftists: "all government spending is good, but crony capitalism and subsidies of things we morally disapprove of are bad!"
The reasoning behind the belief that Tesla is going to crash and burn is pretty solid: the company has been dependent on political favors for its success, it keeps generating losses, it has no significant technology advantage, Tesla's CEO is distracted by all sorts of other crap, it keeps generating bad press, and it's a luxury fashion statement for progressive wealthy elites.
Tesla's most likely fate seems to be to be as a luxury division of one of the big auto makers, the only question is whether it will be acquired at a premium or at a going-out-of-business sale. Having said that, short selling Tesla is still a bad strategy because it can take another decade for Tesla's fate to be decided. Short term, buying Tesla may still be a good investment, even if you don't believe in its product or long term corporate strategy.
Interesting company she keeps.. It's not just the Clintons, but also other Washington power brokers, Republicans and Democrats alike. These politicians publicly denounce crony capitalism and nepotism, and privately are huge beneficiaries and promoters of it. And you can bet that every single one of her board members and political cronies made off like a bandit in her fraud. When these politicians tell you that the system is rigged, they are speaking the truth; what they don't tell you is that the very people who claim they want to fix it are the ones who are rigging it in the first place.
And pollsters wonder why voters reject both the Democratic and the Republican establishment.
If voluntary donors can spend a billion dollars in a failed attempt to get a corrupt senator elected president of the United States, then voluntary donors can spend some money on basic research; no need to forcibly extract the money from taxpayers.
Kamala should add cold fusion to the bill too, because we really need alternative energy! That's how progressives create progress: they write a bill, pour hundreds of billions of money into the hands of corporations, and then magically progress happens! Just look at history, it's how the automobile, the integrated circuit, the telephone, the light bulb, the laser printer, and digital cameras were created! Progressive science policy FTW!
I'm glad you recognize that the inflation-adjusted total is $1.32 trillion. But that underestimates the true cost, because that money would have grown at 5-7% above inflation per year even if just invested in a market average. But to show that NASA spending generated trillions of wealth you have to show that the benefits outweighed other, easily realizable opportunities, not just that it generated more money than spent in constant dollars (of course, you haven't even demonstrated that).
Prior to the Internet, information was a very valuable commodity. US administrations used valuable information to bribe media in exchange for favorable coverage; that's what companies like CNN and NBC became wealthy and powerful. Starting about 20 years ago, information became less valuable and other business models became competitive; FOX was one of the first to discover that.
His explanation is still valid: the relics at the NYT and AP don't know any better than to sell themselves out for information; that's why they continue to operate under the old model. That's also why they liked Obama: Obama still tried to maintain the old model in which a progressive intelligentsia composed of career politicians, intellectuals, and journalists set the agenda and profit handsomely from it. I think Obama will be the last gasp of that model; he only got elected because McCain was an even worse establishment candidate.
Trump was always antagonistic to the media, and he never bribed news media with valuable information. That's why the traditional media hated him so much: their cozy, corrupt relationship with past administrations was over.
Good ol' Eric Holder obtained the records for more than 20 telephone lines of [the AP's] offices and journalists, including their home phones and cellphones. It said the records were seized without notice sometime this year. And this issue is hardly new.
Not a particularly good "investment", given that we spent several trillion dollars on NASA since 1958.
Imagine how many more trillions of dollars we would have gotten in wealth if the money had actually been used by a competent, less corrupt, and more efficient organization than NASA.
No, but taking money forcibly to do it is. So is using that money not to advance knowledge, but to pay off politically connected corporations and groups.
In any case, NASA has a horrible return on investment when it comes to "scientific knowledge and advanced engineering". NASA has been overall a net negative when it comes to space exploration: we'd be further along with space exploration without NASA.
Because two wrongs make a right! You're not hilarious, you're pathetic.
NASA's annual budget is $18 bn. So, those 72% of Americans can accomplish their goal by paying $80 each every year, voluntarily.
Of course, what many of those people are really saying is that they like US space leadership and that others should be taxed to pay for it.
Did I say I "trust" them? Like all reviews, you need to use your head in figuring out whether they are fake or real, and if they are real, what they are actually saying.
People keep coming up with this idea, and it keeps making no sense: you pay a premium for a second display surface that is mostly going to display an image of a keyboard but actually is much harder to type on than a real keyboard.
Baby, you've already been on my "idiot" list, for the simple reason that you can't express yourself clearly.
And by "support" you mean that you did a 180 degree turn?
"No, it's diametrically opposed to how free markets are supposed to operate."