I have to disagree. Please refer to my initial comment, which is correct. Before you call people stupid, perhaps a brush up in simple macroeconomic concepts would be helpful.
But isn't the purpose of the FCC to work for the benefit of the general public? I mean that is the point of the FCC, to regulate the airwaves since the current view is that the airwaves belong to everyone...
That being true, wouldn't it only make sense for the FCC to tell Sirus to go back to the drawing board... 802.11 has been around for a while now, and I would have thought anyone with common sense would have thought to see if this would be a problem. Because Sirus didn't plan around this, I don't see how they can just step in now and demand sweeping changes that will destroy many companies and hinder thousands of businesses and cause millions in losses. How can the FCC protect one company's investment at the expense of so many others?
Well, then again, this is the FCC we are talking about... not exactly the most efficient or best policy making body there is... what can I say?
In my opinion at least, 802.11 was there first, 2.4Ghz has been in use for a long time before Sirus was even thought about, so I would think it would be Sirus's responsibility to fix their problem, not the FCC and millions of Americans to work around Sirus.
Money is "created" whenever a bank makes a loan... it's all about assets and liabilities. Say Joe deposits $100 in the bank. Now in this fantasy land the reserve requirment is 10%, which means that the bank has to keep $10 of that $100 on hand to cover withdrawals. Ok, now Joe has a reciept that says he has $100 in the bank. The Bank has $10 in reserves, and $90 in cash. Now Bob comes in to get a loan. Bob is a nice guy, so the bank gives him the $90 loan he wants to buy a new pair of pants. Ok, now Joe has a balance in his account of $100, the bank has $10 in reserves, and Bob now has $90 in cash. Do you see how money has been "created" now? Money is created all the time by banks... not just the FRBs.
In the event that the bank didn't have enough reserves on hand, then they borrow from other banks overnight, and this is where the Fed Funds market and everything comes into play.
Anyway, the point is, Banks DO create money. When they lend out the $90, the don't have to borrow $90 from another bank to "balance" it. The balance is between assets and liabilities, the bank has a $100 liability with the deposit, but they also have the assets of the $10 in reserve and the $90 loan. So it does balance out, cept there is now $190 in the the money supply when there was only $100 before the deposit was made.
Another one bites the dust from the Slashdot effect...
Perhaps/. could come up with some sort of caching system so the sites that are overwhemed could be accessed at least in the form they were in when it was posted... however there are copyright issues with that im sure...
Yeah, clearly the link says it was the Domesday book, not a Doomsday book. I was somewhat confused to read that they compiled an electronic doomsday book, as I really don't know what a doomsday book is, and furthermore I don't see why anyone would care about a doomsday book that can't be read.
I think a doomsday book from 1998 has been rendeded unreadable also, that edition of the Weekly World News is too faded and yellow to read.
I've seen this happen around Chicago, many tech companies, plus other firms are moving out to the suburbs and out of downtown. Sears, for example, has moved most (if not all) of its offices out of the Sears Tower to a facility out in the 'burbs.
There is what I call the 'tech corridor' along an expressway out in a suburb called Naperville with many large office campuses lining both sides, Motorola, Ameritech, AT&T, and many others are all out there, the growth in recent years has been huge.
I started out with MediaOne Broadband back a few years ago, which then became MediaOne-Roadrunner, which then became MediaOne Express, which changed to AT&T@Home, which is now AT&T Broadband.
I never understood the point of the @Home network, it seemed needlessly redundant. Some people complain that attbi service is slower, but I still seem to get good speeds.
For reference, check this screenshot out of a speed test:
I spent hours getting my site to validate as XHTML 1.1, and CSS, and it renders correctly in modern Netscape browsers, and modern versions of IE. Standards should be the way of the future (and should have been in the past).
Anyway, other that that:
Content! Don't let the design get in the way! KEY EXAMPLE: The new site for The Matrix, awful, design makes it very hard to access information.
Better invest in a good camcorder and tripod, as it looks like thats the only way you'll be able to record any sort of digital TV program in the future.
I'm glad I didn't buy an HDTV, unlike my neighbor who wasted $5000 on one last fall.
Oh no, I didn't mean to say they were not regressive, as they are, but at least you're paying for what you use, so its a little more fair. I agree that the way I wrote it made it seem like I was saying it was not regressive, but that was a mistake on my part.
However, that being said, I don't know exactly to what degree this would hurt the poorer more, as they most likely use the roads less, so I don't know if the money paid from usage would be more or less than the money spent to income tax and gas tax that pay for all roads.
Well, I think this is a good idea, as you would only end up having to pay for the roads that you actually use, instead of having to pay (out of your pocket) for the all of the roads. Before (and still) there was no way to figure out what roads people used, so there would never be any practical way to privatize roads because you couldn't charge people for usage of them. It's the old free rider problem, there is no way to make it so that people who don't pay for it don't use it.
On the flip side, there are problems with this. Of course as someone mentioned it does hit the lower income people harder, but current taxes do that as well, because almost all taxes except for income tax are regressive taxes, which mean that lower income people pay a higher percentage than higher income. Sales tax, Gas Tax, even the lottery are all regressive taxes. At least with this system, you would only pay for what you use.
This will, I'm sure, provide much debate, however at this stage it seems rather impractical to employ, especially with the current road system the way it is.
I'd also be afraid of the privacy issues here as well... but that's a whole other topic.
Slashdot Mirror
This story was posted an hour and fourteen minutes too early...
Isn't it really "Digital Versatile Disk - Video" hense the logo "DVD Video"
What do they have to say about this... I know PC Anywhere 10.1 is "XP Complient" ... and all of that. I think this is being taken out of context
I have to disagree. Please refer to my initial comment, which is correct. Before you call people stupid, perhaps a brush up in simple macroeconomic concepts would be helpful.
But isn't the purpose of the FCC to work for the benefit of the general public? I mean that is the point of the FCC, to regulate the airwaves since the current view is that the airwaves belong to everyone...
That being true, wouldn't it only make sense for the FCC to tell Sirus to go back to the drawing board... 802.11 has been around for a while now, and I would have thought anyone with common sense would have thought to see if this would be a problem. Because Sirus didn't plan around this, I don't see how they can just step in now and demand sweeping changes that will destroy many companies and hinder thousands of businesses and cause millions in losses. How can the FCC protect one company's investment at the expense of so many others?
Well, then again, this is the FCC we are talking about... not exactly the most efficient or best policy making body there is... what can I say?
In my opinion at least, 802.11 was there first, 2.4Ghz has been in use for a long time before Sirus was even thought about, so I would think it would be Sirus's responsibility to fix their problem, not the FCC and millions of Americans to work around Sirus.
Money is "created" whenever a bank makes a loan... it's all about assets and liabilities. Say Joe deposits $100 in the bank. Now in this fantasy land the reserve requirment is 10%, which means that the bank has to keep $10 of that $100 on hand to cover withdrawals. Ok, now Joe has a reciept that says he has $100 in the bank. The Bank has $10 in reserves, and $90 in cash. Now Bob comes in to get a loan. Bob is a nice guy, so the bank gives him the $90 loan he wants to buy a new pair of pants. Ok, now Joe has a balance in his account of $100, the bank has $10 in reserves, and Bob now has $90 in cash. Do you see how money has been "created" now? Money is created all the time by banks... not just the FRBs.
In the event that the bank didn't have enough reserves on hand, then they borrow from other banks overnight, and this is where the Fed Funds market and everything comes into play.
Anyway, the point is, Banks DO create money. When they lend out the $90, the don't have to borrow $90 from another bank to "balance" it. The balance is between assets and liabilities, the bank has a $100 liability with the deposit, but they also have the assets of the $10 in reserve and the $90 loan. So it does balance out, cept there is now $190 in the the money supply when there was only $100 before the deposit was made.
Another one bites the dust from the Slashdot effect...
/. could come up with some sort of caching system so the sites that are overwhemed could be accessed at least in the form they were in when it was posted... however there are copyright issues with that im sure...
Perhaps
Hey i thought this was clever. Heh. The better headline would have been "Mission Critical Linux in Critical Condition" heh.
Yeah, clearly the link says it was the Domesday book, not a Doomsday book. I was somewhat confused to read that they compiled an electronic doomsday book, as I really don't know what a doomsday book is, and furthermore I don't see why anyone would care about a doomsday book that can't be read.
I think a doomsday book from 1998 has been rendeded unreadable also, that edition of the Weekly World News is too faded and yellow to read.
I'm counting on Sealand to pass some copyright laws that allow me to obtain all the good names ;)
There are times when redundancy is good, i.e. redundant power backups, and such...
and I know plenty of ATTBI users who are happy. Not all of them expect the speed of the latest fibre technology for $39/month.
"But officer, you see, it's for my electrophysics class."
I've seen this happen around Chicago, many tech companies, plus other firms are moving out to the suburbs and out of downtown. Sears, for example, has moved most (if not all) of its offices out of the Sears Tower to a facility out in the 'burbs.
There is what I call the 'tech corridor' along an expressway out in a suburb called Naperville with many large office campuses lining both sides, Motorola, Ameritech, AT&T, and many others are all out there, the growth in recent years has been huge.
Um, its also what I pay for. Bandwidth isn't free you know.
Im running XP Professional, at times I used to get higher speeds on @Home, but now I consistantly get decent speeds of ~150-180 KB/sec.
I started out with MediaOne Broadband back a few years ago, which then became MediaOne-Roadrunner, which then became MediaOne Express, which changed to AT&T@Home, which is now AT&T Broadband.
I never understood the point of the @Home network, it seemed needlessly redundant. Some people complain that attbi service is slower, but I still seem to get good speeds.
For reference, check this screenshot out of a speed test:
http://www.whichwayup.org/images/leet.gif
Hmm, perhaps a Sim that teaches government officials how to avoid corruption?
Sort of like what we tell the kids, you know, "Just say no!"
Will this improve the quality of crop circles?
If I had one of those, I could always tell my friends, "You see, my home is powered by a miniature nuclear reactor, notice the impressive glow."
Protective eyeware is, of course, optional.
Standards, Standards, Standards!
I spent hours getting my site to validate as XHTML 1.1, and CSS, and it renders correctly in modern Netscape browsers, and modern versions of IE. Standards should be the way of the future (and should have been in the past).
Anyway, other that that:
Content! Don't let the design get in the way! KEY EXAMPLE: The new site for The Matrix, awful, design makes it very hard to access information.
I don't know about this. Just another component to break, and leaking water INSIDE the laptop would be bad. Is it really worth it?
Better invest in a good camcorder and tripod, as it looks like thats the only way you'll be able to record any sort of digital TV program in the future.
I'm glad I didn't buy an HDTV, unlike my neighbor who wasted $5000 on one last fall.
Oh no, I didn't mean to say they were not regressive, as they are, but at least you're paying for what you use, so its a little more fair. I agree that the way I wrote it made it seem like I was saying it was not regressive, but that was a mistake on my part.
However, that being said, I don't know exactly to what degree this would hurt the poorer more, as they most likely use the roads less, so I don't know if the money paid from usage would be more or less than the money spent to income tax and gas tax that pay for all roads.
Well, I think this is a good idea, as you would only end up having to pay for the roads that you actually use, instead of having to pay (out of your pocket) for the all of the roads. Before (and still) there was no way to figure out what roads people used, so there would never be any practical way to privatize roads because you couldn't charge people for usage of them. It's the old free rider problem, there is no way to make it so that people who don't pay for it don't use it.
On the flip side, there are problems with this. Of course as someone mentioned it does hit the lower income people harder, but current taxes do that as well, because almost all taxes except for income tax are regressive taxes, which mean that lower income people pay a higher percentage than higher income. Sales tax, Gas Tax, even the lottery are all regressive taxes. At least with this system, you would only pay for what you use.
This will, I'm sure, provide much debate, however at this stage it seems rather impractical to employ, especially with the current road system the way it is.
I'd also be afraid of the privacy issues here as well... but that's a whole other topic.
So couldn't this somehow be used so that someone could end up walking to school, in the snow, uphill BOTH ways?