No, Firewire being more expensive to license or just get the damn specs for killed Firewire. Or at least set it into something of a niche. It still is the standard for consumer video, and every last digital cable box uses it.
Indeed. And it's even worse than that. Try getting some real data on how to use one of TI's FireWire chips. if you're not willing to commit to basically a fab run of parts, they actively discourage you from considering the parts. Too bad... one of their parts would have been perfect for a design I was working on.
Seriously. The guy is a disturbed political nut job on par with Ann Coulter and knows nothing about technolgy other than he has a blog which only he's allowed to post on and pretty much nobody reads. This idiot was and still is a huge War Supporter. Frankly most people are sick of Glenn Reynolds, the Right Wing's Ward Churchill.
Who modded this post flamebait? Reynolds is a complete wacko wingnut fucktard. His opinions about technology are as worthless as his opinions about politics.
That means every mail server operator, even the home hobbiest... Buy a fucking dictionary, will ya? (Or at least use Firefox and its built-in spell check.)
Of course, the typical American response is going to be this:
For a couple days, half of people will get upset over the abuse of power and invasion of privacy and misuse of government while the other half excuse and justify it with comments like "if ya don't have nuthin' tuh hide" and "we're at war - you have to give up some freedoms to be safe during war!".
Ah, so then by that logic, Alberto Gonzales, Harriet Miers and Karl Rove should be the first ones to volunteer to testify in front of the House and Senate committees investigating the federal attorney firings. After all, if they had nothing to hide, then they should have no objections to testifying under oath, in public, with published transcripts made available immediately.
I am from Arizona (No DST here) Our clocks don't change, I work for one of the many companys (SIC!!!!!!!) that always shifted our working hours with the rest of the country, kept our hours in synch with the home office. Problem now is that our working hours start at 7am during the winter, and we need light to work efficiently, that always worked 7am winter, 6am summer switched at DST. The new DST doesn't work, too dark at 6am, so were still switching our working hours with the old DST.
So the old DST worked better, more savings would have been to pass a law that all 9 to 5 single shift employers starting should now work 8 to 4.
And imagine all the smoke detectors, now their batteries must last months longer!!
I'm in Arizona, too, and all I can say is: daylight saving time is idiotic. It's an anachronism and should be abolished, like the Electoral College.
My previous employer's main office was in San Diego, and we took advantage of the differences and changes in the time zones. "Hey, we were here an hour before you guys got in, so we're leaving an hour earlier. Don't expect us to answer the phone at 6pm your time; it's 7pm here!"
Why should capital gains be taxed? I grant that there is a need for a tax system to support the government, and that it there are good things about a progressive tax, but neither of those things implies that capital gains should be taxed. If capital gains should be taxed, should there be inflation relief when calculating the gains? There isn't. And that disproportionately affects lower income people(because the capital gains tax they pay will generally be larger relative to their overall income).
At a minimum, capital gains taxes don't help investment(investment is generally a good thing right?), so we should make sure there is a reason to charge them, other than 'should'.
Basically, it isn't clear to me that taxing someone any and every time they end up with more than they started with is the best way to create a 'fair' system, which is presumably the goal.
Go back to what I said: some people make their living by buying and selling real-estate investments. They don't collect a salary, so they don't pay payroll and income taxes like most people. So, you're saying that I should pay taxes because I'm "working for the man" and these investors shouldn't pay taxes?
There are plenty of issues with a sales tax/prebate system (although far less than the current system) - getting money to people isn't one of them. It's just not that hard to do. Also, since this is a "tax prebate", rather than welfare, it can come with a lot less strings attached.
I can see it now... the inevitable charges of fraud perpetrated by low-income people (or, as the usual right-wing nutjobs will say, "those who act poor to bilk the system"). And if there's a chance of fraud, then there's law enforcement, which costs money and requires agents.
So you replace the IRS, a government agency charged with dealing with and enforcing the tax code, with some other government agency charged with dealing with and enforcing some other tax code.
Of course, I also like the FairTax sales tax system more and more as I think about it, assuming that after we lay off the IRS and pare down government we can get the sales tax rate to something under %20.
Some problems with this:
We could pay for any of the big social programs, and have $$$$ to spare, if we stopped pissing away money in that clusterfuck called Iraq. How many billions has that been? How many trillions will it cost when all is said and done?
Getting rid of the IRS and paring down the federal government won't reduce the tax burden significantly, as you also have state and local governments that provide the services everyone expects and in fact requires (roads, police force, fire departments, primary and secondary schools, etc). So one immediate result of reducing the federal income (or, if you must, sales) tax would be the increase in state and local taxes to make up the difference. Sure, there are a bunch of states without an incoming tax, but there's a fee or tax for every conceivable transaction.
Bonus points if we can convince companies to mark their prices with tax included.
That's not really fair for the consumer who is trying to compare prices across different tax jurisdictions.
To me, it makes sense to tax the value created by building a house once and call it good, rather than making a societal grab every time someone else starts using it(Property taxes are o.k., I'm talking about the 'income' from selling the house). OK, so what about the people who make a living buying and selling houses? Real estate is an investment, no different from buying stocks or anything else whose value appreciates. So if there's a capital gain on that investment, then it should be taxed as such.
What's so complicated about a rebate? I've heard they have these newfangled inventions these days that can transfer money to an account with very little human effort... For starters, you give the government money, and some point in time later (a year later?), you get it back. And you get it back AFTER filling out paperwork, which can often be confusing (hey, it's tax time now...). Do they have to keep receipts? Or does the gov't keep receipts? And many bottom-income people don't have checking or savings accounts, and there's no way to transfer money to a non-existent account.
And the low-income people need the money NOW to pay bills (like rent and food) and literally can't afford to wait a year to get the money back.
The whole rebate plan is a non-starter.
-a
Wow, a 10m USB cable. I wonder how many of those get returned because they don't work. (10m exceeds the 5m USB spec, which has nothing to do with cable losses and everything to do with turn-around time).
adults have full rights and therefore this law would be unconstitutional
Not really. Libraries may be public but they are still owned and operated by the government. That means it's their call as to what goes on there. It's not violating your rights because you can still access whatever you want anywhere else.
Even if they somehow blocked a website for everyone it still wouldn't be a violation of your rights but rather the rights of the person running the website being blocked. Even that would be questionable because they aren't actually stopping you from saying something(freedom of speech intact) but they may as well be.
Dunno what universe you live in, but here in the US, "Owned and operated by the government" MEANS "public."
And it's called censorship when the government decides what someone can and cannot read/hear/view.
A private company (like your employer) is well within their rights to block any and all Internet traffic it deems inappropriate, in much the same way they can say, "No porno mags in the bathroom." No, this is not censorship, as it's not the government doing this.
Of course this leads right into the Net Neutrality debate, as the tubes are owned and operated by private companies who are arguing that they can do anything they want with their property. This differs from the airwaves (broadcast radio and TV), which are actually owned by the public, and an agency operating in the public trust (the FCC) grants a monopoly on the usage (transmission) to whoever can pony up enough dough for a license. The FCC (the government) also retains the right to censor broadcasts (hence big fines for profanity and wardrobe malfunctions).
So with all of these contradictions, my head is spinning...
Face it... the large military contractors (the Raytheons, the Halliburtons, the whomevers) are not rewarded for their innovations. They're rewarded, in units of large contracts for weapons systems with questionable necessity and dubious quality, for their contributions to the campaigns of the political leaders who control those contracts. Can you said "quid pro quo"? Sure you can. And the more impressive-sounding and more expensive the proposed weapons systems are, the more likely the funders get hard-ons for them.
Oh, yeah, and let's add in the concept of cost-plus contracts, where the contractors make more money the more they spend. There's no incentive to build anything for a reasonable cost, and no incentive not to keep piling on the extensions and overruns.
So simple things, like better body armor and better defense for humvees and the cheap electronic ID-things mentioned in the article, which aren't sexy (but save lives), don't get the attention of the Big Contractors nor their political funders.
I'm kinda surprised that Raytheon hasn't tried to stamp out the little guys...
Honestly, she looked fine before the surgery. She claims she was at a low point in her life and so on, and didn't even consider surgery till only 3 weeks before she got it. What do you expect when you make such a serious decision on such short notice while admittedly depressed?
How does a computer that runs off a DC wall-wart get you an AC current? The wall-wart converts AC to DC, and if it's broken, the chassis of the laptop might float with respect to the mains ground. And you'd measure that with an AC voltmeter.
Slashdot Mirror
No, Firewire being more expensive to license or just get the damn specs for killed Firewire. Or at least set it into something of a niche. It still is the standard for consumer video, and every last digital cable box uses it.
Indeed. And it's even worse than that. Try getting some real data on how to use one of TI's FireWire chips. if you're not willing to commit to basically a fab run of parts, they actively discourage you from considering the parts. Too bad ... one of their parts would have been perfect for a design I was working on.
Who modded this post flamebait? Reynolds is a complete wacko wingnut fucktard. His opinions about technology are as worthless as his opinions about politics.
There -- I said it. A strong union wouldn't let a company get away with this kind of shit.
Maybe he's talking about the original version...
For a couple days, half of people will get upset over the abuse of power and invasion of privacy and misuse of government while the other half excuse and justify it with comments like "if ya don't have nuthin' tuh hide" and "we're at war - you have to give up some freedoms to be safe during war!".
Ah, so then by that logic, Alberto Gonzales, Harriet Miers and Karl Rove should be the first ones to volunteer to testify in front of the House and Senate committees investigating the federal attorney firings. After all, if they had nothing to hide, then they should have no objections to testifying under oath, in public, with published transcripts made available immediately.
So the old DST worked better, more savings would have been to pass a law that all 9 to 5 single shift employers starting should now work 8 to 4.
And imagine all the smoke detectors, now their batteries must last months longer!!
I'm in Arizona, too, and all I can say is: daylight saving time is idiotic. It's an anachronism and should be abolished, like the Electoral College.
My previous employer's main office was in San Diego, and we took advantage of the differences and changes in the time zones. "Hey, we were here an hour before you guys got in, so we're leaving an hour earlier. Don't expect us to answer the phone at 6pm your time; it's 7pm here!"
At a minimum, capital gains taxes don't help investment(investment is generally a good thing right?), so we should make sure there is a reason to charge them, other than 'should'.
Basically, it isn't clear to me that taxing someone any and every time they end up with more than they started with is the best way to create a 'fair' system, which is presumably the goal.
Go back to what I said: some people make their living by buying and selling real-estate investments. They don't collect a salary, so they don't pay payroll and income taxes like most people. So, you're saying that I should pay taxes because I'm "working for the man" and these investors shouldn't pay taxes?
I can see it now ... the inevitable charges of fraud perpetrated by low-income people (or, as the usual right-wing nutjobs will say, "those who act poor to bilk the system"). And if there's a chance of fraud, then there's law enforcement, which costs money and requires agents.
So you replace the IRS, a government agency charged with dealing with and enforcing the tax code, with some other government agency charged with dealing with and enforcing some other tax code.
Funny, I don't see the benefit.
3) Replace ballistic missile defense with a national reality distortion field.
The interesting thing is that the reality distortion field actually works.
Some problems with this:
- We could pay for any of the big social programs, and have $$$$ to spare, if we stopped pissing away money in that clusterfuck called Iraq. How many billions has that been? How many trillions will it cost when all is said and done?
- Getting rid of the IRS and paring down the federal government won't reduce the tax burden significantly, as you also have state and local governments that provide the services everyone expects and in fact requires (roads, police force, fire departments, primary and secondary schools, etc). So one immediate result of reducing the federal income (or, if you must, sales) tax would be the increase in state and local taxes to make up the difference. Sure, there are a bunch of states without an incoming tax, but there's a fee or tax for every conceivable transaction.
Bonus points if we can convince companies to mark their prices with tax included.That's not really fair for the consumer who is trying to compare prices across different tax jurisdictions.
So, about that Internet sales tax ...
And the low-income people need the money NOW to pay bills (like rent and food) and literally can't afford to wait a year to get the money back.
The whole rebate plan is a non-starter.
-a
... is two words.
Wow, a 10m USB cable. I wonder how many of those get returned because they don't work. (10m exceeds the 5m USB spec, which has nothing to do with cable losses and everything to do with turn-around time).
Will you PLEASE learn how to fucking spell!
Lose, not loose, you ignorant tool.
Not really. Libraries may be public but they are still owned and operated by the government. That means it's their call as to what goes on there. It's not violating your rights because you can still access whatever you want anywhere else.
Even if they somehow blocked a website for everyone it still wouldn't be a violation of your rights but rather the rights of the person running the website being blocked. Even that would be questionable because they aren't actually stopping you from saying something(freedom of speech intact) but they may as well be.
Dunno what universe you live in, but here in the US, "Owned and operated by the government" MEANS "public."
And it's called censorship when the government decides what someone can and cannot read/hear/view.
A private company (like your employer) is well within their rights to block any and all Internet traffic it deems inappropriate, in much the same way they can say, "No porno mags in the bathroom." No, this is not censorship, as it's not the government doing this.
Of course this leads right into the Net Neutrality debate, as the tubes are owned and operated by private companies who are arguing that they can do anything they want with their property. This differs from the airwaves (broadcast radio and TV), which are actually owned by the public, and an agency operating in the public trust (the FCC) grants a monopoly on the usage (transmission) to whoever can pony up enough dough for a license. The FCC (the government) also retains the right to censor broadcasts (hence big fines for profanity and wardrobe malfunctions).
So with all of these contradictions, my head is spinning ...
Face it ... the large military contractors (the Raytheons, the Halliburtons, the whomevers) are not rewarded for their innovations. They're rewarded, in units of large contracts for weapons systems with questionable necessity and dubious quality, for their contributions to the campaigns of the political leaders who control those contracts. Can you said "quid pro quo"? Sure you can. And the more impressive-sounding and more expensive the proposed weapons systems are, the more likely the funders get hard-ons for them.
Oh, yeah, and let's add in the concept of cost-plus contracts, where the contractors make more money the more they spend. There's no incentive to build anything for a reasonable cost, and no incentive not to keep piling on the extensions and overruns.
So simple things, like better body armor and better defense for humvees and the cheap electronic ID-things mentioned in the article, which aren't sexy (but save lives), don't get the attention of the Big Contractors nor their political funders.
I'm kinda surprised that Raytheon hasn't tried to stamp out the little guys ...
"You don't go to war with the military you want. You go to war with the military you have."
Nice job of blaming the victim, asshole.
Country: the music of tolerance.
Shaun The Sheep Of The Dead!
It's two words and a malformed ( possessive | contraction ) using an initialism.