Hands down, America can re-distribute its economic resources to what really counts economically.
For awhile there, it was expanding the presence of the Web. Right now, its transferring capital to make a more liquid real-estate market due to all the new-found wealth.
The free flow of economic resources it what makes America Great, and at the same time, rutheless!
Excitingly rutheless.
You'll never see the ready public acceptance of mass layoffs anywhere else in the worl.
Tech workers need layoffs, they are economic resources. The re-distributing to higher demanding positions.
"The world needs plenty of ditch-diggers!"
In the private business market in America. You don't see money being thrown at things that won't produce profits. For instance, satellite consumer products are tough to make money on. Most of the recent satellite based consumer products being dreamed up, aren't here in America. They just don't make enough money. They quickly fade away, for instance "Irridium".
Internet satellite radio seems to be fighting a slow death, but in reality, it's a mere flash in the pan. The internet does just as good a job without a satellite (for instance www.Spinner.com)
Do you want a society where great majority , using Democracy as a tool , votes itself into bankruptcy by constantly shifting tax burden onto ever smaller class of so called rich ?
Hell no, then there'd be no reason to visit Venezeula, or Brazil.
O'Reilly, but I've never heard anyone argue in favour of regressive taxation before.
Cigarette, and Gas Tax is regressive.
Take for example a rich man and a poor man, both smoke 1 pack a day.
At the end of the year, they pay the same tax. But, as a percentage of income, the poor man pays a much higher percentage of income, hence, a regressive tax.
I've seen poor and rich alike as chain smokers.
Many people argue that the Cigarette tax is a good thing.
Think about it. The pack a day poor man pays about $700 / year in taxes on Cigarettes. (Assuming $2/pack tax).
Also, the passed along increase in the cost of cigarettes due to the Big Tabacco Lawsuit settlement.
In the end, Big Tobacco doesn't pay the Billions. The poor pay most of it.
---- Myself? I see it as evening things out. The current tax situation is too progressive. ---- Beware of populism. That's what won the Big Tobacco lawsuit. The problem is, nobody took to the time to really examine whom would pay the damages. In the end it's the poor!!!! Isn't this system a joke?
Somewhere along the line, the Chubaka Defense
has been institutionalized to bamboozle the public.
As in, denile is a great thing. And some people (slightly less than 50%) think Progressive taxation is a great thing.
So, mix a little denile with something else (Progressive Taxation) and try and pin it on breaking the law.
"Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury.... It all comes down to this... Am I making any sense? Does this make any sense?
If Chubaka lives on Endor, then it's okay to Pirate."
--- On a side note, to say Progressive - Good, Regressive - Bad??????
Here are a couple good Regressives:
1. Gas Tax. A regressive tax. Helps encourage fuel economy, discourages frivolous travel.
2. Cigareete Tax. A regressive tax. Helps discourage smoking, less lung cancer and second hand smoke. Smoking is really for the rich actors and actresses so they can appear debonair on the silver screen.
I know that American Mobile Satellite had insurance about, oh, 8 years ago for the launch. It was something like $60M. The bird was the size of a school bus from what I understand.
At the beginning of a project. You need to decide. Do we even want insurance? Do we feel lucky?
As Engineers, we didn't sit around all day debating on whether or not we should got o base-3 computing instead of base-2.
We spent our days solving problems. Also, we learned how to do this in a timely fashion. Get it right the first time, or fail the test because you run out of time.
Why does Intel having no other competitors making PC Chips mean that they have no competition.
The truth about intel's competition is found by changing your sites on where the competition lies.
The Internet, as Microsoft correctly concluded was their competition. More and more processing power moves away from the PC, and onto large servers processing all the information, thus, rendering the great masses of PC's as Dumb Terminals. "The local operating systems as a replaceable commodity."
Let's face it, more and more, Intel Pentiums have become processors for dumb terminals.
Once a PC's processor has the capability to display any image in realtime at 24 Frames Per Second, then there is no need for advancement in processing power. All the additional processing power is used and demanded by servers.
Seems to me some of the greatest advancements in PCs' performance has come more from:
1. Cheaper yet faster Memory (RAM and HARD-DRIVES) 2. Faster more powerful Graphics Display Hardware.
Than from the microprocessor's MIPS rating on the CPU.
I really can't think or conceptualize over 1 Billion commands to give my Pentium ever second. But, I certainly could visualize a Billion Bytes worth of info for my Graphics card to process in the form of an (.mpeg), say, to watch a movie or something.
Many old people I meet get paranoid of newer technology. The reason is twofold.
1. Dimensia, like Alzeimers is setting in. Causes paranoia
2. Because of 1, they are unable to keep up the pace with technology and have no idea what it can do. For instance, there is no artificial intelligence out there. We haven't even build the intelligence of a cricket into a computer yet.
It sad to see these people losing their minds this way. In the past, the brain used to outlive the body. Now it's the other way around. You've got perfectly healthy people all over the place talking some weird paranoid s$%&t.
Give me a break over this "nanology". You have no idea how far away this is from reality.
Intake Won't Work
on
Landshark
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I doubt top speed will be 50. I've owned Jet Skis, and one thing you learn about is cavitation, and something call the Scoop Grate.
Basically, the stock setup that came with my KW-650SX goes barely 40Mph. But it was because at 40Mph, not enough water is going through the impeller. So, with the simple addition of an after market scoop grate, I added about 3Mph (All it did was lower the scoop about 1/4 an inch. I got another 2Mph out of a stainless steel prop, and anouth 2Mph out of a new ride plain.
Pulling in water as it passes alog the side of a wheel just won't work.
It's a really cool design though to have the wheels sucking in water to pump out, but he really needs to redesign. Basically, you need to scoop the water in.
Also, since it's a fairly heavy thing, it can actually go faster on water that 50Mph because of the added stability. My stand-up jet-ski weighs about 260lbs and at 46Mpg its a not a pleasure cruise, but on a heavier 550lbs waverunner it is a pleasure to cruise at even 50Mph.
Rethink the water intake to something more direct and it'll go more like 75-95 on water. Horseopower isn't the issue, fluid dynamics is.
You'll have to judge for yourself whether this makes me a libertarian. Some of what they have to say has merit. Some is a bit...idealistic. Like the rest of us, they want to believe the world is simpler than it really is.
I really don't have any problem with what they say. Though, if Libertarians were a Java Package, or Application, well let's just say they'd have a bunch of abstract classes still needing to be implemented.
For awhile I was considering becoming a big "L" libertarian, then decided, I do need to figure out the difference between big D's and big R's and pick the one that's a little closer to big L in my implementation of all these abstracts left open by the big L's. You know what they say, "shit or get off the pot." So now (for pas few years), I'm officially a member of one of the major parties. I don't need to tell you which, it's not important. Or is it?
You can't pipe a bowl of rice down a T1 Line. I don't care what kind of bandwidth you have.
Politics is the source of starvation and illiteracy.
There's more than enough food, and bandwidth for every human being on Earth (though maybe not quite enough IP addresses, but that's what subnets and routers are for).
Politics is keeping sacks of corn in a warehouse in Africa, the same corn I ate last night, but some politician told the African not to eat it because of genetic engineering. Though this is a small case compared to the politics of tribal wars in Africa.
Politics is keeping loved ones from communicating with eachother around the world. I have no idea about Asia, though I don't think it's as bad there as in Africa. Pathetic! That's the best word for the politics coming "Out of Africa" (sic)... Pathetic. (not to mention ponderous).
Bottom line. People are dying, have died, will die because of this decision. It's tough to make sense to the dead person why he couldn't eat some corn.
The U.S. didn't send this corn Europe, and it won't make its way from Africa to Europe. It is for consumption, not planting.
I wonder if at the time, ARPANET was considered frivolous spending? Do we consider the development of the Drone plane frivolous (the one that killed that Al Qaeda top leader in Yemen a couple days ago).
You'll never get the will of non-brainwashed voters.
Is it fair? to turn on the news, and be told how you think?
It's crazy. Most of the election issues are decided by the media with pre-determined polls. Questions by pollsters are desinged to determine the outcome of the poll. The poll is then presented on the news without actually telling you this.
How can we have fair elections with that?
And, Ralph Nader. That's another one. Yeah if it weren't for him, Gore would be Prez...
But, don't forget, it was the same thing with Ross Perot. If you want to change the rules so that AL Gore would've won because he would get Nader's votes, then you would have to go back to 1992 and George Bush Sr. would've won. He definitely lost due to Perot.
The final solution is... Pick the system and stick with it. No changing the rules! Enforce the rules as best you can without bankrupting the system.
I love PHP. I learned Web Programming with PHP. It was a more intuitive move for me from C++ and Powerbuilder development.
The main reason I love it, is that it greatly accelerated my HTML learning curve.
For my career to really take off, however, I passed the Java Certification (which by the way, had zero HTML). Now, I was able to quickly ramp up Java Programmer to J2EE developer with thanks in part to PHP.
Now, I was on PHP3. And there was only one drawback I had with it, I'm sure has been solved. I found it hard to develeop large modular systems because if the way you use the #include directive. It seemed even more picky than C's #include in the order. It was tough to get around chicked befor the eggs problems like.... Hey, you use this method from one php3 module, but that method uses a method from another module. Everything had to be in the right order.
J2EE is a deployment nightmare, nothing against the actual spec... It's the verdors' implimentations that can be a real pain.
The power is definitely there with PHP. Enough similarities with Perl to please all I feel.
I hope Yahoo can definitely give something back to PHP, particularly, catering the language to be flexible to develop huge systems.
I forecasted this was going to happen about a year ago here on Slashdot. It was so clear then to me.
Simple economics. They need 400k subscribers on day 1. They need millions of subscribers within a year. They're off by an order of magnitude.
I have first hand knowlege and experience of how these things get off the ground in the first place.
Basically, the marketing is done too much by engineers and scientists.
I contributed to this by co-developing a very sophisticated software application that analysed terrain data from US Geological survey. The results showed that there was a huge potential target market.
You've got scientists on the one end wanting desperately to build a new bird that does what no other bird does. What they have no clue about is how the consumer couldn't give a damn that incredible technology was involved and hundreds of millions spent to bring some sweet sweet sounds to their automobiles.
XM is far simpler than some of the other 2 way projects like Satellite telephones (American Mobile Satellite, dba Motient).
They need to find a way to put a bird up there that not only provides a nice product, it's got to provide a revenue stream in the order of billions.
400,000 subs is only going to get you about $100M per year. You need to start out getting about $1B per year.
I say, follow the successful business model of the Internet. What put Internet commerce on the map? Porn. For some reason, porn enthusiats are very willing paying customers.
Re:Highway funds only persuasive to some states
on
The Free State Project
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
It's only if your net take is larger than your net input that witholding of federal highway funds is persuasive.
Wrong logic. This only would be true if a state could choose to fund its own highways and not pay any federal taxes that go into the federal highway fund.
Your state's taxpayers pay the Fed. And your state tries to get it back for you in the name of funds.
And you can't tell me it isn't political. boatloads of the cash earmarked for highways don't even go to anything having to do with transportation.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got 1 and 3 in one window. The latest technology I use, I re-build while the server is running. Sometimes it's a little slow.
But I'd like something more like the debugger in multiple windows.
1. Call Stack
2. Variables ( but this needs to be much better for objects.
3. Line of code that I'm actually on.
When I was at Auburn, we had Star Wars funding to look into this. We had created a diode that switched at 2000 celcius.
The idea was to have IC circuits right inside the rocket engines.
Hands down, America can re-distribute its economic resources to what really counts economically.
For awhile there, it was expanding the presence of the Web. Right now, its transferring capital to make a more liquid real-estate market due to all the new-found wealth.
The free flow of economic resources it what makes America Great, and at the same time, rutheless!
Excitingly rutheless.
You'll never see the ready public acceptance of mass layoffs anywhere else in the worl.
Tech workers need layoffs, they are economic resources. The re-distributing to higher demanding positions.
"The world needs plenty of ditch-diggers!"
In the private business market in America. You don't see money being thrown at things that won't produce profits. For instance, satellite consumer products are tough to make money on. Most of the recent satellite based consumer products being dreamed up, aren't here in America. They just don't make enough money. They quickly fade away, for instance "Irridium".
Internet satellite radio seems to be fighting a slow death, but in reality, it's a mere flash in the pan. The internet does just as good a job without a satellite (for instance www.Spinner.com)
Try this... Buy American. Very high quality.
Do you want a society where great majority , using Democracy as a tool , votes itself into bankruptcy by constantly shifting tax burden onto ever smaller class of so called rich ?
Hell no, then there'd be no reason to visit Venezeula, or Brazil.
Life without Samba? No way!
Plus, how about this argument.
The typical dude that can afford a computer, with high-speed connection to make File-Sharing easy would be considered fairly wealthy.
The poor can't really afford this.
File-sharing is more enjoyed buy upper-middle class that working class.
Heck, I have a very wealthy friend that uses file-sharing. We're always talking about it, and how he doesn't buy CD's anymore, why bother?
So, with that argument, the poor have to buy the more expensive CD's while the rich just download them.
Think.. A $45/month Cable Modem connectin pays for itself, if you download a few CD's worth of MP3's per month.
O'Reilly, but I've never heard anyone argue in favour of regressive taxation before.
Cigarette, and Gas Tax is regressive.
Take for example a rich man and a poor man, both smoke 1 pack a day.
At the end of the year, they pay the same tax. But, as a percentage of income, the poor man pays a much higher percentage of income, hence, a regressive tax.
I've seen poor and rich alike as chain smokers.
Many people argue that the Cigarette tax is a good thing.
Think about it. The pack a day poor man pays about $700 / year in taxes on Cigarettes. (Assuming $2/pack tax).
Also, the passed along increase in the cost of cigarettes due to the Big Tabacco Lawsuit settlement.
In the end, Big Tobacco doesn't pay the Billions. The poor pay most of it.
Isn't that a hoot? In the end, the trial lawyers are stealing from the poor! Philip Moris' stock has done just fine these past two years.It's held it's value while the DOW is down 20%
----
Myself? I see it as evening things out. The current tax situation is too progressive.
----
Beware of populism. That's what won the Big Tobacco lawsuit. The problem is, nobody took to the time to really examine whom would pay the damages. In the end it's the poor!!!! Isn't this system a joke?
Somewhere along the line, the Chubaka Defense
has been institutionalized to bamboozle the public.
Huh? Wha? Piracy = Progressive Tax?
As in, denile is a great thing. And some people (slightly less than 50%) think Progressive taxation is a great thing.
So, mix a little denile with something else (Progressive Taxation) and try and pin it on breaking the law.
"Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury.... It all comes down to this... Am I making any sense? Does this make any sense?
If Chubaka lives on Endor, then it's okay to Pirate."
--- On a side note, to say Progressive - Good, Regressive - Bad??????
Here are a couple good Regressives:
1. Gas Tax. A regressive tax. Helps encourage fuel economy, discourages frivolous travel.
2. Cigareete Tax. A regressive tax. Helps discourage smoking, less lung cancer and second hand smoke. Smoking is really for the rich actors and actresses so they can appear debonair on the silver screen.
He watches the Red-Green Show!
No wonder he practically pieced this thing together with Duct Tape!
What next? A Linux based Lawn-mower made out of an ol washing machine?
And I thought I was the only one that gets too tired to stay up late enough to watch Red Green.
Insurance is very expensive, yes indeed.
I know that American Mobile Satellite had insurance about, oh, 8 years ago for the launch. It was something like $60M. The bird was the size of a school bus from what I understand.
At the beginning of a project. You need to decide. Do we even want insurance? Do we feel lucky?
We've impoved the software industry.
As Engineers, we didn't sit around all day debating on whether or not we should got o base-3 computing instead of base-2.
We spent our days solving problems. Also, we learned how to do this in a timely fashion. Get it right the first time, or fail the test because you run out of time.
Engineering discipline.
Why does Intel having no other competitors making PC Chips mean that they have no competition.
The truth about intel's competition is found by changing your sites on where the competition lies.
The Internet, as Microsoft correctly concluded was their competition. More and more processing power moves away from the PC, and onto large servers processing all the information, thus, rendering the great masses of PC's as Dumb Terminals. "The local operating systems as a replaceable commodity."
Let's face it, more and more, Intel Pentiums have become processors for dumb terminals.
Once a PC's processor has the capability to display any image in realtime at 24 Frames Per Second, then there is no need for advancement in processing power. All the additional processing power is used and demanded by servers.
Seems to me some of the greatest advancements in PCs' performance has come more from:
1. Cheaper yet faster Memory (RAM and HARD-DRIVES)
2. Faster more powerful Graphics Display Hardware.
Than from the microprocessor's MIPS rating on the CPU.
I really can't think or conceptualize over 1 Billion commands to give my Pentium ever second. But, I certainly could visualize a Billion Bytes worth of info for my Graphics card to process in the form of an (.mpeg), say, to watch a movie or something.
Many old people I meet get paranoid of newer technology. The reason is twofold.
1. Dimensia, like Alzeimers is setting in. Causes paranoia
2. Because of 1, they are unable to keep up the pace with technology and have no idea what it can do. For instance, there is no artificial intelligence out there. We haven't even build the intelligence of a cricket into a computer yet.
It sad to see these people losing their minds this way. In the past, the brain used to outlive the body. Now it's the other way around. You've got perfectly healthy people all over the place talking some weird paranoid s$%&t.
Give me a break over this "nanology". You have no idea how far away this is from reality.
I doubt top speed will be 50. I've owned Jet Skis, and one thing you learn about is cavitation, and something call the Scoop Grate.
Basically, the stock setup that came with my KW-650SX goes barely 40Mph. But it was because at 40Mph, not enough water is going through the impeller. So, with the simple addition of an after market scoop grate, I added about 3Mph (All it did was lower the scoop about 1/4 an inch. I got another 2Mph out of a stainless steel prop, and anouth 2Mph out of a new ride plain.
Pulling in water as it passes alog the side of a wheel just won't work.
It's a really cool design though to have the wheels sucking in water to pump out, but he really needs to redesign. Basically, you need to scoop the water in.
Also, since it's a fairly heavy thing, it can actually go faster on water that 50Mph because of the added stability. My stand-up jet-ski weighs about 260lbs and at 46Mpg its a not a pleasure cruise, but on a heavier 550lbs waverunner it is a pleasure to cruise at even 50Mph.
Rethink the water intake to something more direct and it'll go more like 75-95 on water. Horseopower isn't the issue, fluid dynamics is.
You'll have to judge for yourself whether this makes me a libertarian. Some of what they have to say has merit. Some is a bit...idealistic. Like the rest of us, they want to believe the world is simpler than it really is.
I really don't have any problem with what they say. Though, if Libertarians were a Java Package, or Application, well let's just say they'd have a bunch of abstract classes still needing to be implemented.
For awhile I was considering becoming a big "L" libertarian, then decided, I do need to figure out the difference between big D's and big R's and pick the one that's a little closer to big L in my implementation of all these abstracts left open by the big L's. You know what they say, "shit or get off the pot." So now (for pas few years), I'm officially a member of one of the major parties. I don't need to tell you which, it's not important. Or is it?
Great points. You must be a Libertarian with a librarian's knowledge.
You can't pipe a bowl of rice down a T1 Line. I don't care what kind of bandwidth you have.
Politics is the source of starvation and illiteracy.
There's more than enough food, and bandwidth for every human being on Earth (though maybe not quite enough IP addresses, but that's what subnets and routers are for).
Politics is keeping sacks of corn in a warehouse in Africa, the same corn I ate last night, but some politician told the African not to eat it because of genetic engineering. Though this is a small case compared to the politics of tribal wars in Africa.
Politics is keeping loved ones from communicating with eachother around the world. I have no idea about Asia, though I don't think it's as bad there as in Africa. Pathetic! That's the best word for the politics coming "Out of Africa" (sic)... Pathetic. (not to mention ponderous).
Bottom line. People are dying, have died, will die because of this decision. It's tough to make sense to the dead person why he couldn't eat some corn.
The U.S. didn't send this corn Europe, and it won't make its way from Africa to Europe. It is for consumption, not planting.
>
I wonder if at the time, ARPANET was considered frivolous spending? Do we consider the development of the Drone plane frivolous (the one that killed that Al Qaeda top leader in Yemen a couple days ago).
That's fairly subject on your part.
Exit polls asked the question to Perot voters.. If they couldn't vote Perot, who would the vote for?
Bush took enough of them to win.
You'll never get the will of non-brainwashed voters.
Is it fair? to turn on the news, and be told how you think?
It's crazy. Most of the election issues are decided by the media with pre-determined polls. Questions by pollsters are desinged to determine the outcome of the poll. The poll is then presented on the news without actually telling you this.
How can we have fair elections with that?
And, Ralph Nader. That's another one. Yeah if it weren't for him, Gore would be Prez...
But, don't forget, it was the same thing with Ross Perot. If you want to change the rules so that AL Gore would've won because he would get Nader's votes, then you would have to go back to 1992 and George Bush Sr. would've won. He definitely lost due to Perot.
The final solution is... Pick the system and stick with it. No changing the rules! Enforce the rules as best you can without bankrupting the system.
I work for Discovery. Contracting here is very competitive. Headhunting firms don't sit around on their asses relying on email to get through.
This won't go far.
I love PHP. I learned Web Programming with PHP. It was a more intuitive move for me from C++ and Powerbuilder development.
The main reason I love it, is that it greatly accelerated my HTML learning curve.
For my career to really take off, however, I passed the Java Certification (which by the way, had zero HTML). Now, I was able to quickly ramp up Java Programmer to J2EE developer with thanks in part to PHP.
Now, I was on PHP3. And there was only one drawback I had with it, I'm sure has been solved. I found it hard to develeop large modular systems because if the way you use the #include directive. It seemed even more picky than C's #include in the order. It was tough to get around chicked befor the eggs problems like.... Hey, you use this method from one php3 module, but that method uses a method from another module. Everything had to be in the right order.
J2EE is a deployment nightmare, nothing against the actual spec... It's the verdors' implimentations that can be a real pain.
The power is definitely there with PHP. Enough similarities with Perl to please all I feel.
I hope Yahoo can definitely give something back to PHP, particularly, catering the language to be flexible to develop huge systems.
I forecasted this was going to happen about a year ago here on Slashdot. It was so clear then to me.
Simple economics. They need 400k subscribers on day 1. They need millions of subscribers within a year. They're off by an order of magnitude.
I have first hand knowlege and experience of how these things get off the ground in the first place.
Basically, the marketing is done too much by engineers and scientists.
I contributed to this by co-developing a very sophisticated software application that analysed terrain data from US Geological survey. The results showed that there was a huge potential target market.
You've got scientists on the one end wanting desperately to build a new bird that does what no other bird does. What they have no clue about is how the consumer couldn't give a damn that incredible technology was involved and hundreds of millions spent to bring some sweet sweet sounds to their automobiles.
XM is far simpler than some of the other 2 way projects like Satellite telephones (American Mobile Satellite, dba Motient).
They need to find a way to put a bird up there that not only provides a nice product, it's got to provide a revenue stream in the order of billions.
400,000 subs is only going to get you about $100M per year. You need to start out getting about $1B per year.
I say, follow the successful business model of the Internet. What put Internet commerce on the map? Porn. For some reason, porn enthusiats are very willing paying customers.
It's only if your net take is larger than your net input that witholding of federal highway funds is persuasive.
Wrong logic. This only would be true if a state could choose to fund its own highways and not pay any federal taxes that go into the federal highway fund. Your state's taxpayers pay the Fed. And your state tries to get it back for you in the name of funds. And you can't tell me it isn't political. boatloads of the cash earmarked for highways don't even go to anything having to do with transportation.