Romantic and theoretical. The reality is you have the programming language, tools, rights, APIs and documentation to program anything for iOS or iPhone. Your nostalgia is well intended, but the reality is that an iPad is more affordable relatively than a Commodore+Monitor+Disk drive at the apogee of that computer. And that having to call a company and request technical details is "less accessible" to just downloading manuals, dev kits, etc. off the internet at home or the nearest cafe.
The reality is that, today, people are learning to play piano, engineer music, edit videos, prepare for SAT, write books, publish albums, paint masterpieces, make new friends, discover new music, learn new math skills while on th bus back home, as opposed to just being forced to read a book or talk to whoever sat next to them. Which is much more productive than what you could do with the commodore in the 80s. I miss those days, but look at what you can do with these "locked" devices, and it doesn't matter except if you have a deep interest in hardware, firmware and OS programming.
>Give the same vehicles to those who do not really want to do anything and they will use the vehicles to cruise around, to rob banks, and so on
Robbing banks isn't for the people that want to do nothing. And if they are ok with robbing a bank, they will not use their own cars but likely stolen ones. Do you not see how idiotic your comment is? People may be interested in philosophy, or poetry, or psychology and not give a damn about how the car works. The buy it to cruise around which is what cars were invented for.
Is this sarcastic? If not, it's definitely one of the most annoying and disrespectful comments I have seen in a long while. Shithole neighborhoods, "we must educate", noble savages...Sad prose.
PC games are orders of magnitude cheaper and you only need one computer with a good video card. The only thing consoles add is practicality, a consistent interface and some exclusives. A console will be limited by it's current video card. You can upgrade the one on your PC very very easily and very cheaply.
Now, I only play occasionally on my iPhone. I no longer feel any need to sit where my console dictates it to me, and $7 for the most expensive game (like Infinity Blade II) is much better than $70. The fact that some are shorter than console versions is also a plus for me.
It doesn't. You don't know what conversations Motorola and Google had, and Motorola's future was pretty much tied to Android vs Windows Phone debates, so they would have to incline one way or another.
People that are extremely bored and that in all likelihood would like to no have to endure 1, 2 or 3 more years of boring lectures that aren't -in many cases- in touch with reality (spin intended) use their computers to:
- Have distracting hobbies such as collecting stuff (Used file-sharing programs) - Chat with people that have nothing to do with their field of study - Communicate with friends and relatives unrelated to studies. - Role play and live more exciting live (Online video viewing and game playing) - Entertain themselves with video
I can relate to them. I felt that way during part of my time at university (5 full years non-stop, about 180 lectures per month and 700 books later, I really really felt like escaping some "nights").
My advise is, if you are in that situation, know it's temporary. I can say that the "stay hungry, stay poor, my friends" from Steve Jobs isn't bullshit. It really means do what you like...once you enter the "security road to nowhere" it's very difficult to change. I had the luck of going for adventure to some other country, and that was one of the most rewarding decisions I ever made. Bake a backup plan, and then go for Plan A...trust your luck more than you trust your security (but always have boring Plan B ready).
Do you use the phone or internet for talking to people on work or personal time? Do you use roads for transportation? Do you go with your clothes on, even if you are a nudist? Do you use electricity generated partially by nuclear reactors? There are conventions, and networks effects. If you want your friends to be able to see what you are doing, and you want to see what they are doing, you must use Facebook. Just like you can protest against electricity by simply not using it, and avoid roads and public transport, or the inverse, you must use clothes if you want to walk in public places. Facebook is the same today, with hundreds of millions of users, most people use that and you either retire socially, or you accept that people chose that.
I am not trying to convince you. I am just say that you proposed solution isn't free: my friends would have much less contact, and I'd know a lot less about them. Email, phone, etc. are not the way most communicate socially today.
I agree to both posts. This one and the Parent. You need to be there with people with limited income to know them. In many cases, the way to talk, the way to move your hands (gracefully or no?), the sports you know, the way you dress and the music you listen to determine your social status more than anything else. I have to say that in most cases, richer people think of poor people -as a rule thumb and most of the times as an absolute- as an inferior being just by poor act of being less wealthy, connected and useful. And you only need to feed these people some examples to prove to their minds that they are all the same. Once a good, religious an ethical person finds their personal examples (eg. a relatively rich beggar, or a lazy poor, or an aggressive poor) they generalize, and that's it, forever or until they have an extraordinary experience that makes them rethink everything.
I say I am in some way fortunate, because while living in Mexico, I traveled a lot. And that exposed me to a lot of what you'd consider extremely poor people. I have been invited to dinner, lunch, or offered ANYTHING that they had for free, and being asked NOTHING in return, countless of times. In many cases, even offering something in return was considered rude. I have asked for directions there thousands of times, and be offered several minutes, hundreds (literally) of times, for free. I have traveled to houses of relatives of friends that that happened to be very poor by our standards. And offered shelter. And they would give me the best room in their house. And would accept me slipping in a couch. These are all POOR people, that never once asked me for something in return, or reminded me of what they did, ever.
Are all people like this? No. There are lazy people, hard working people, crazy people, selfish people, generous people. I only found that to be the case in the places I traveled to in Mexico. Which kind of makes me sad, because in the environment I grew in, most tend to regard the poorer as truly inferior beings to be used, criticized, used as examples of how not to end, leveraged as best argument of why the economy sucks, and generally tolerated by the fact that according to the bible they have a likewise soul.
I am happy that I was able to live those experiences. Being poor is very complicated, but it should be a shame. You could actually be very virtuous. As you can being rich (a bit harder!). But a quality of a person, if judged even partially by any means related to economic ability, speaks more of the speaker than anything else.
>Any money he manages to keep out of the government's hands, is money that won't be used to intrude on the freedom we have left.
In this case, you are abysmally wrong. Facebook is a great way to intrude the few freedoms you and everyone else had left. And is also the propaganda platform of the future. If Facebook decides to put a notice, hundreds of millions of people will have to read it. They have more power than TV, online media and any other media combined.
I just wish Facebook was something really open and more democratic. Or that there were alternatives that would communicate with each other. Just like with email. I think that may be more important than where Saverin pays taxes.Arguments of the kind "don't use it, you are free" are kind of hollow. I either chose not to interact with all my friends online as they are used to, or subdue to mission of make privacy the private property of Facebook shareholder and world-class spies and bullies.
>Reduce total taxes 15% (from 62% to 52% in this case) Ouch. Meant to say 62% to 47%. Where it says 85, it means 8.5% (same 8% as befor, just not rounded)
I don't know how it works, but I see a friend and wife that makes about $150,000 a year, pays about 37% for Federal, then has to pay NY -work- and the NJ -residence- state taxes (another 12% or more), then Social Security, then medicare, then medicaid, then has to buy a good medical plan (because health cost is prohibitive if you get anything even slightly serious due to immense regulation, patents, etc.), then has to pay about $8000 in property taxes (public schools are horrible in their area, so they have to pay proper schooling), sales tax (varies), and all the other taxes (oil, import duties, etc, etc.). At the end of the day, they added all just to understand why they felt poor: about 62% of the income belongs to the government.
No wonder that the stock market is doing shitty, and that the private sector needs to buy work in China. Their earnings are taxes at 35%, and they also pay a lot of other taxes (which means everything gets 35% more expensive, investor do not care what the rate is as this is passed always to consumers, and if it's a global good, then they just compare which place ends up being cheaper). So no wonder that it's impossible to make a profit with anything truly made in the USA...and they are trying to sell to middle class like my friend that has 38% of his income available, and that needs to pay housing, school for 2 kids, car leasing and food. Where his total taxes something more like 40%, they'd have 50% more money to spend on goods and services for the private sector. Now suppose the government raises Federal equiv. of 2% of their combined income. And that NJ decides to increase from property tax by equiv. to 1%. Just an example (they recently raised property tax, btw)...that reduces his available income by about 8%, so it's an 8% collapse in his worth to the private sector. Pretty big hit. And the government many times raises taxes to cover for Keynesian measures to increase spending and revive the economy? He's already spending everything! Now, that 85 isn't a clear indicator of the impact. He won't reduce housing costs, leasing costs, school or insurance. This weights about 65%...so that 3% increase in tax burden, now mean that sectors that are not: housing, schooling, car/insurance, see a reduction in spending of about 23%. So we see a reduction of 23% of the private economy, and an increase of 3% in government (Federal/State) spending. In truth, the numbers are worst than that. They save for retirement about 5%. So whenever the POOR but hard working people see the latest politician argue for a raise in taxes the RICH to make things better, be wary: you'd be killing your safest income sourcing -the middle class- to give it to the government. And if you are hard working, the government does very little for you.
Now imagine the opposite. Reduce total taxes 15% (from 62% to 52% in this case), and experience the private sector that sells to the private sector (most SMBs) see an increase in demand of about 113%.
I'd say the only reason that populists governments end up destroying capitalism and democracy is because more people are on the government payroll. And they can have any opinion, but everywhere, in any country I've studied, they will support the candidate that seems safest regarding continuing their job safety.
Going to the basics, Adam's Smith call was to let the private sector make whatever they want, and trade whatever they wanted. That didn't mean no rules. Today, Free Market means you can manufacture and trade anything...and you can almost do that for 995 of goods. Regulation is orthogonal: it can limit competition in a market, or foster it. For example, the Government stepping in and pointing to AT&T they cannot buy T-Mobile is a regulation to protect a free market. And yes, If you have little or no choice, you don't have a free market. You have a monopoly and no much freedom, except for the monopolist price maker. I don't mean to say free isn't free. I only mean to say that regulations do not imply - but are often associated with - regulated "trade".
It's easier than that. First, you need software that can educate. My kid is learning the names of animals, to do basic math (additions, substractions, etc) with games. There are many different "learn games". He is two years old. The key? Only the best games, which means: 1) has educational value 2) kids find interesting/rewarding. When that happens, they learn a lot and very fast.
Computers are meaningless. The real challenge are the applications, how to make them educational but awesomely interesting. The problem with the approach is that many largely replace the "teacher-lecturer". Nobody understands this very well, because the % of parents with 1-3 years old is small vs the total population. And then many don't use any valuable apps.
Textbooks are the most outdated, boring thing on earth, and I don't know how new generation will put up with this once thy have tasted user friendliness and delightful customer experiences. I presume a large portion of "self-education" will shake education in about 5 years. Massively. Just like consumerization is forcing IT organizations to support what their leaders wants to use: namely, Android and iOS tablets and phones. A large part of all this is enabled by four things: 1) WYTIWYG (what you touch is what you get), 2) Always On (mobile data, and equipment that lasts 10 hours without outlets), the concept of an App Store (every seller sees what app is selling, and if they can improve it, they will have very clear the market reward for improving upon it. Very easy to estimate the top seller income. For users, they think a problem, and search for a solution, and base purchase based on ratings) and Micropayments (everyone has 2 more dollars here and there) - now everyone gets a chance to sell something. $1.99 x 1,000,000 isn't bad. Some apps sell 50,000,000. In a decade or more, I presume some apps will sell 100,000,000 at maybe $5.
The 4 things above creates a huge market opportunity to the best app to learn math, animals, whatever. And that is what drives e-education: amazing software. No cheap computers.
On the other hand, the OLPC is wrong. The iPad has a larger chance of revolutionizing education. Subsidy iPad Gen 1 at $200, or good Android Tablets. And give the app for free to Africa and very poor countries. That can change the world.
So in one case visual, and the other auditory. I cannot for the sake of me read a number backwards. I need to read it forward, and stop 1 number before finishing, 2 numbers before finishing. Of course, if I am seeing it, I can immediately "read" the number backwards. But the moment it's no in sight, I lose it. Every kid has a lot of different ways he/she has learned to use for different things. I don't think that means that there's a problem. The problem is more on the education, that assume a standard, and when it sees a deviation, they call you dumb, slow, special or whatever. This guy though he was bad a math for so long, t find out he was extremely proficient? And we have an educational system that didn't find out? So what are the teachers doing if they don't know this? The same with the reading out loud. Some people aren't strng at processing images, period. And they are extremely bright. For me, it goes to show how little millions of educations know, when they think they know everything. And how much harm they can do as well.
Why not create two workspaces, and then with a bit of code, automatically update your status? The other option (which I do use) is having a distinct place (like dinner table) for "playing". Problem is, I also don't like to be interrupted when concentrated on my pet projects, and the real challenge is just power down (or sleep) the thing. Lastly, I found that the iPad helps a lot. If I am using it, my family knows I am not working, and thus I can accomplish little with it (at least when I am sitting in "plain sight").
I found out that using a full headset helps a lot. My significant other doesn't kno when I am on a call or not. And for me, it's work mode. At first, I didn't do it intentionally, but then I noticed it's a clear indication of "I am really really busy"..like the "Away" sign in Messenger.. I don't do that all days, but when I need extra silence, it works. I wish I had a door I could close though.
I'd argue differently. Today, the amount of external software (not by Apple) is maybe 98%. Back in the day, a large chunk of the software was by MS, or Apple. So today, the one with more market share gets more attention from any producer interested in generating revenue. And as they put more attention, they ensure the sucess of the platform with the largest share. Microsoft or Google would have to create a significant advantage to developers to compensate for the reduced revenue (Apple generates much more revenue for sellers), and they themselves cannot provide that advantage. There's so much software that only runs on iPad that the point is moot.
The ONLY possible solution is for an Apple clone, or some other easy porting tool. But now it's all full of IP. I think that Apple has created a monopoly until the next mayor innovation takes place, maybe 10 or 20 years from now.
macs4all, you didn't get the point. We want to be able to replace the battery. We don't think the product is obsolete. if the BEST TECH DESIGN company in the world can't design a way for us to change the battery more easily, the world is doomed. And it is doomed (maybe), for for different reasons. It makes no sense to make a device as powerful as an Ipad last only 3 years. The iPad 1 can still do amazing things that you cannot do on a computer (like play a piano, or paint to name just two out of a thousand things), but for many, their battries has started to fail.
There's absolutely no way they couldn't have though of some other way to make it more serviceable.
Where is the research that says you need a really high IQ to become a lawyers or doctors, what are you gonna do? herd them into camps? In addition, there are many many cases of people with "lower IQs" that are ultra rich, and have made fortunes just by not thinking that hard about their math classes, or whatever classes, including Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and many more.
I believe you have a point. Uneducated masses. But that also means uneducated in values, culture, being responsible, self esteem, belief, optimism. I can tell that I've been more successful when I forget about the IQ part, and focus on the fun, the absolute need to not compete with anyone (but myself, and cheerfully), the social skills (not forced, but really appreciated), strong will (which is not looking for every way to short-circuit life towards a result), intuition, and ability to flow more freely in general. If this sounds abstract, look for Forrest Gump as a more poetic way to look at it. If you need evidence, try it yourself and report results. You cna always go back to your super titles and high IQ mode.
The problem is not the problem. The iCloud config defaults to NOT using backups unless you are on WiFi. If a users WANTS to backup while on cellular, should they be prevented? Using streaming audio or video likely consumes more bandwidth than that, and the value of an always fresh backup at zero cost and highly available isn't a bad option. Obviously, the carriers don't win anything with unlimited plans..They found out the cannot cross sell or up sell 99% of the things they though they could control (video distribution, applications, an email account, a backup, and all kind of crap - just remember the old days). So they need to start metering so that people with more expensive modern devices and more money can do things that only money can buy. It's just natural to charge more to those that use more. The only thing to consider is that the SLAs are met, and that the price somewhat resembles the true cost, so that carriers cannot extract monopoly power on a good so important that the vast majority would not do without.
The car? It's nothing. Not even the charriots. The wheel? They just cut wood/stuff an a slight different proportion from the center. Nothing you couldn't do with sharpened stones and/or metals. Same with fire, now they call it "lighter"...how fashionable for something that is eternally old and that we have been creating with just two thin lodges, or even shaking stones.
The thing is I like the content, but not being the product. I got upset with Netflix when they announced Quickster and canceled streaming. Then reasoned that I prefer them to Cable companies (I hate the STB and all they tactics, and all the commercials) and signed back. Another way to vote is not buying anything. But that's more like not voting, as in I don't care. I do care and voted for no ads, and no cheats (Cable)
I once decided to start an adventure and live one year in a foreign country I knew nothing about. I was looking for a job, and have every disadvantage: didn't know the culture, the geography, the local brands, companies, uses, names for many things, didn't have friends, a place to live, relatives nor an understanding of the uses and customs. I had visas that expired every year, and that my employer would have to sponsor. But I got a nice job. The deciding factor? I had calculated the CAGR of a revenue series using division and exponentiation as opposed to using the Excel formula.
Why? I once realized I was acting mechanically, and forgetting formulas. So I got a bunch of formulas and asked why was it exactly so, reasoning every angle until I felt I could explain what was going on with natural language. After that, I realized I could think up formulas very easily, including more complicated stuff like combinatorials, statistical series, etc. Of course, I chose to avoid the calculator this one time...one never knows what one will learn:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Romantic and theoretical. The reality is you have the programming language, tools, rights, APIs and documentation to program anything for iOS or iPhone. Your nostalgia is well intended, but the reality is that an iPad is more affordable relatively than a Commodore+Monitor+Disk drive at the apogee of that computer. And that having to call a company and request technical details is "less accessible" to just downloading manuals, dev kits, etc. off the internet at home or the nearest cafe.
The reality is that, today, people are learning to play piano, engineer music, edit videos, prepare for SAT, write books, publish albums, paint masterpieces, make new friends, discover new music, learn new math skills while on th bus back home, as opposed to just being forced to read a book or talk to whoever sat next to them. Which is much more productive than what you could do with the commodore in the 80s. I miss those days, but look at what you can do with these "locked" devices, and it doesn't matter except if you have a deep interest in hardware, firmware and OS programming.
I'd rate this insightful if I had mod points. The article is a joke literally.
>Give the same vehicles to those who do not really want to do anything and they will use the vehicles to cruise around, to rob banks, and so on
Robbing banks isn't for the people that want to do nothing. And if they are ok with robbing a bank, they will not use their own cars but likely stolen ones. Do you not see how idiotic your comment is? People may be interested in philosophy, or poetry, or psychology and not give a damn about how the car works. The buy it to cruise around which is what cars were invented for.
Is this sarcastic? If not, it's definitely one of the most annoying and disrespectful comments I have seen in a long while. Shithole neighborhoods, "we must educate", noble savages...Sad prose.
PC games are orders of magnitude cheaper and you only need one computer with a good video card. The only thing consoles add is practicality, a consistent interface and some exclusives. A console will be limited by it's current video card. You can upgrade the one on your PC very very easily and very cheaply.
Now, I only play occasionally on my iPhone. I no longer feel any need to sit where my console dictates it to me, and $7 for the most expensive game (like Infinity Blade II) is much better than $70. The fact that some are shorter than console versions is also a plus for me.
It doesn't. You don't know what conversations Motorola and Google had, and Motorola's future was pretty much tied to Android vs Windows Phone debates, so they would have to incline one way or another.
People that are extremely bored and that in all likelihood would like to no have to endure 1, 2 or 3 more years of boring lectures that aren't -in many cases- in touch with reality (spin intended) use their computers to:
- Have distracting hobbies such as collecting stuff (Used file-sharing programs)
- Chat with people that have nothing to do with their field of study
- Communicate with friends and relatives unrelated to studies.
- Role play and live more exciting live (Online video viewing and game playing)
- Entertain themselves with video
I can relate to them. I felt that way during part of my time at university (5 full years non-stop, about 180 lectures per month and 700 books later, I really really felt like escaping some "nights").
My advise is, if you are in that situation, know it's temporary. I can say that the "stay hungry, stay poor, my friends" from Steve Jobs isn't bullshit. It really means do what you like...once you enter the "security road to nowhere" it's very difficult to change. I had the luck of going for adventure to some other country, and that was one of the most rewarding decisions I ever made. Bake a backup plan, and then go for Plan A...trust your luck more than you trust your security (but always have boring Plan B ready).
Do you use the phone or internet for talking to people on work or personal time? Do you use roads for transportation? Do you go with your clothes on, even if you are a nudist? Do you use electricity generated partially by nuclear reactors? There are conventions, and networks effects. If you want your friends to be able to see what you are doing, and you want to see what they are doing, you must use Facebook. Just like you can protest against electricity by simply not using it, and avoid roads and public transport, or the inverse, you must use clothes if you want to walk in public places. Facebook is the same today, with hundreds of millions of users, most people use that and you either retire socially, or you accept that people chose that.
I am not trying to convince you. I am just say that you proposed solution isn't free: my friends would have much less contact, and I'd know a lot less about them. Email, phone, etc. are not the way most communicate socially today.
I agree to both posts. This one and the Parent. You need to be there with people with limited income to know them. In many cases, the way to talk, the way to move your hands (gracefully or no?), the sports you know, the way you dress and the music you listen to determine your social status more than anything else. I have to say that in most cases, richer people think of poor people -as a rule thumb and most of the times as an absolute- as an inferior being just by poor act of being less wealthy, connected and useful. And you only need to feed these people some examples to prove to their minds that they are all the same. Once a good, religious an ethical person finds their personal examples (eg. a relatively rich beggar, or a lazy poor, or an aggressive poor) they generalize, and that's it, forever or until they have an extraordinary experience that makes them rethink everything.
I say I am in some way fortunate, because while living in Mexico, I traveled a lot. And that exposed me to a lot of what you'd consider extremely poor people. I have been invited to dinner, lunch, or offered ANYTHING that they had for free, and being asked NOTHING in return, countless of times. In many cases, even offering something in return was considered rude. I have asked for directions there thousands of times, and be offered several minutes, hundreds (literally) of times, for free. I have traveled to houses of relatives of friends that that happened to be very poor by our standards. And offered shelter. And they would give me the best room in their house. And would accept me slipping in a couch. These are all POOR people, that never once asked me for something in return, or reminded me of what they did, ever.
Are all people like this? No. There are lazy people, hard working people, crazy people, selfish people, generous people. I only found that to be the case in the places I traveled to in Mexico. Which kind of makes me sad, because in the environment I grew in, most tend to regard the poorer as truly inferior beings to be used, criticized, used as examples of how not to end, leveraged as best argument of why the economy sucks, and generally tolerated by the fact that according to the bible they have a likewise soul.
I am happy that I was able to live those experiences. Being poor is very complicated, but it should be a shame. You could actually be very virtuous. As you can being rich (a bit harder!). But a quality of a person, if judged even partially by any means related to economic ability, speaks more of the speaker than anything else.
>Any money he manages to keep out of the government's hands, is money that won't be used to intrude on the freedom we have left.
In this case, you are abysmally wrong. Facebook is a great way to intrude the few freedoms you and everyone else had left. And is also the propaganda platform of the future. If Facebook decides to put a notice, hundreds of millions of people will have to read it. They have more power than TV, online media and any other media combined.
I just wish Facebook was something really open and more democratic. Or that there were alternatives that would communicate with each other. Just like with email. I think that may be more important than where Saverin pays taxes.Arguments of the kind "don't use it, you are free" are kind of hollow. I either chose not to interact with all my friends online as they are used to, or subdue to mission of make privacy the private property of Facebook shareholder and world-class spies and bullies.
>Reduce total taxes 15% (from 62% to 52% in this case)
Ouch. Meant to say 62% to 47%. Where it says 85, it means 8.5% (same 8% as befor, just not rounded)
I don't know how it works, but I see a friend and wife that makes about $150,000 a year, pays about 37% for Federal, then has to pay NY -work- and the NJ -residence- state taxes (another 12% or more), then Social Security, then medicare, then medicaid, then has to buy a good medical plan (because health cost is prohibitive if you get anything even slightly serious due to immense regulation, patents, etc.), then has to pay about $8000 in property taxes (public schools are horrible in their area, so they have to pay proper schooling), sales tax (varies), and all the other taxes (oil, import duties, etc, etc.). At the end of the day, they added all just to understand why they felt poor: about 62% of the income belongs to the government.
No wonder that the stock market is doing shitty, and that the private sector needs to buy work in China. Their earnings are taxes at 35%, and they also pay a lot of other taxes (which means everything gets 35% more expensive, investor do not care what the rate is as this is passed always to consumers, and if it's a global good, then they just compare which place ends up being cheaper). So no wonder that it's impossible to make a profit with anything truly made in the USA...and they are trying to sell to middle class like my friend that has 38% of his income available, and that needs to pay housing, school for 2 kids, car leasing and food. Where his total taxes something more like 40%, they'd have 50% more money to spend on goods and services for the private sector. Now suppose the government raises Federal equiv. of 2% of their combined income. And that NJ decides to increase from property tax by equiv. to 1%. Just an example (they recently raised property tax, btw)...that reduces his available income by about 8%, so it's an 8% collapse in his worth to the private sector. Pretty big hit. And the government many times raises taxes to cover for Keynesian measures to increase spending and revive the economy? He's already spending everything! Now, that 85 isn't a clear indicator of the impact. He won't reduce housing costs, leasing costs, school or insurance. This weights about 65%...so that 3% increase in tax burden, now mean that sectors that are not: housing, schooling, car/insurance, see a reduction in spending of about 23%. So we see a reduction of 23% of the private economy, and an increase of 3% in government (Federal/State) spending. In truth, the numbers are worst than that. They save for retirement about 5%. So whenever the POOR but hard working people see the latest politician argue for a raise in taxes the RICH to make things better, be wary: you'd be killing your safest income sourcing -the middle class- to give it to the government. And if you are hard working, the government does very little for you.
Now imagine the opposite. Reduce total taxes 15% (from 62% to 52% in this case), and experience the private sector that sells to the private sector (most SMBs) see an increase in demand of about 113%.
I'd say the only reason that populists governments end up destroying capitalism and democracy is because more people are on the government payroll. And they can have any opinion, but everywhere, in any country I've studied, they will support the candidate that seems safest regarding continuing their job safety.
Going to the basics, Adam's Smith call was to let the private sector make whatever they want, and trade whatever they wanted. That didn't mean no rules. Today, Free Market means you can manufacture and trade anything...and you can almost do that for 995 of goods. Regulation is orthogonal: it can limit competition in a market, or foster it. For example, the Government stepping in and pointing to AT&T they cannot buy T-Mobile is a regulation to protect a free market. And yes, If you have little or no choice, you don't have a free market. You have a monopoly and no much freedom, except for the monopolist price maker. I don't mean to say free isn't free. I only mean to say that regulations do not imply - but are often associated with - regulated "trade".
It's easier than that. First, you need software that can educate. My kid is learning the names of animals, to do basic math (additions, substractions, etc) with games. There are many different "learn games". He is two years old. The key? Only the best games, which means: 1) has educational value 2) kids find interesting/rewarding. When that happens, they learn a lot and very fast.
Computers are meaningless. The real challenge are the applications, how to make them educational but awesomely interesting. The problem with the approach is that many largely replace the "teacher-lecturer". Nobody understands this very well, because the % of parents with 1-3 years old is small vs the total population. And then many don't use any valuable apps.
Textbooks are the most outdated, boring thing on earth, and I don't know how new generation will put up with this once thy have tasted user friendliness and delightful customer experiences. I presume a large portion of "self-education" will shake education in about 5 years. Massively. Just like consumerization is forcing IT organizations to support what their leaders wants to use: namely, Android and iOS tablets and phones. A large part of all this is enabled by four things: 1) WYTIWYG (what you touch is what you get), 2) Always On (mobile data, and equipment that lasts 10 hours without outlets), the concept of an App Store (every seller sees what app is selling, and if they can improve it, they will have very clear the market reward for improving upon it. Very easy to estimate the top seller income. For users, they think a problem, and search for a solution, and base purchase based on ratings) and Micropayments (everyone has 2 more dollars here and there) - now everyone gets a chance to sell something. $1.99 x 1,000,000 isn't bad. Some apps sell 50,000,000. In a decade or more, I presume some apps will sell 100,000,000 at maybe $5.
The 4 things above creates a huge market opportunity to the best app to learn math, animals, whatever. And that is what drives e-education: amazing software. No cheap computers.
On the other hand, the OLPC is wrong. The iPad has a larger chance of revolutionizing education. Subsidy iPad Gen 1 at $200, or good Android Tablets. And give the app for free to Africa and very poor countries. That can change the world.
So in one case visual, and the other auditory. I cannot for the sake of me read a number backwards. I need to read it forward, and stop 1 number before finishing, 2 numbers before finishing. Of course, if I am seeing it, I can immediately "read" the number backwards. But the moment it's no in sight, I lose it. Every kid has a lot of different ways he/she has learned to use for different things. I don't think that means that there's a problem. The problem is more on the education, that assume a standard, and when it sees a deviation, they call you dumb, slow, special or whatever. This guy though he was bad a math for so long, t find out he was extremely proficient? And we have an educational system that didn't find out? So what are the teachers doing if they don't know this? The same with the reading out loud. Some people aren't strng at processing images, period. And they are extremely bright. For me, it goes to show how little millions of educations know, when they think they know everything. And how much harm they can do as well.
Why not create two workspaces, and then with a bit of code, automatically update your status? The other option (which I do use) is having a distinct place (like dinner table) for "playing". Problem is, I also don't like to be interrupted when concentrated on my pet projects, and the real challenge is just power down (or sleep) the thing. Lastly, I found that the iPad helps a lot. If I am using it, my family knows I am not working, and thus I can accomplish little with it (at least when I am sitting in "plain sight").
I found out that using a full headset helps a lot. My significant other doesn't kno when I am on a call or not. And for me, it's work mode. At first, I didn't do it intentionally, but then I noticed it's a clear indication of "I am really really busy"..like the "Away" sign in Messenger.. I don't do that all days, but when I need extra silence, it works. I wish I had a door I could close though.
I'd argue differently. Today, the amount of external software (not by Apple) is maybe 98%. Back in the day, a large chunk of the software was by MS, or Apple. So today, the one with more market share gets more attention from any producer interested in generating revenue. And as they put more attention, they ensure the sucess of the platform with the largest share. Microsoft or Google would have to create a significant advantage to developers to compensate for the reduced revenue (Apple generates much more revenue for sellers), and they themselves cannot provide that advantage. There's so much software that only runs on iPad that the point is moot.
The ONLY possible solution is for an Apple clone, or some other easy porting tool. But now it's all full of IP. I think that Apple has created a monopoly until the next mayor innovation takes place, maybe 10 or 20 years from now.
macs4all, you didn't get the point. We want to be able to replace the battery. We don't think the product is obsolete. if the BEST TECH DESIGN company in the world can't design a way for us to change the battery more easily, the world is doomed. And it is doomed (maybe), for for different reasons. It makes no sense to make a device as powerful as an Ipad last only 3 years. The iPad 1 can still do amazing things that you cannot do on a computer (like play a piano, or paint to name just two out of a thousand things), but for many, their battries has started to fail.
There's absolutely no way they couldn't have though of some other way to make it more serviceable.
Where is the research that says you need a really high IQ to become a lawyers or doctors, what are you gonna do? herd them into camps? In addition, there are many many cases of people with "lower IQs" that are ultra rich, and have made fortunes just by not thinking that hard about their math classes, or whatever classes, including Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and many more.
I believe you have a point. Uneducated masses. But that also means uneducated in values, culture, being responsible, self esteem, belief, optimism. I can tell that I've been more successful when I forget about the IQ part, and focus on the fun, the absolute need to not compete with anyone (but myself, and cheerfully), the social skills (not forced, but really appreciated), strong will (which is not looking for every way to short-circuit life towards a result), intuition, and ability to flow more freely in general. If this sounds abstract, look for Forrest Gump as a more poetic way to look at it. If you need evidence, try it yourself and report results. You cna always go back to your super titles and high IQ mode.
The problem is not the problem. The iCloud config defaults to NOT using backups unless you are on WiFi. If a users WANTS to backup while on cellular, should they be prevented? Using streaming audio or video likely consumes more bandwidth than that, and the value of an always fresh backup at zero cost and highly available isn't a bad option. Obviously, the carriers don't win anything with unlimited plans..They found out the cannot cross sell or up sell 99% of the things they though they could control (video distribution, applications, an email account, a backup, and all kind of crap - just remember the old days). So they need to start metering so that people with more expensive modern devices and more money can do things that only money can buy. It's just natural to charge more to those that use more. The only thing to consider is that the SLAs are met, and that the price somewhat resembles the true cost, so that carriers cannot extract monopoly power on a good so important that the vast majority would not do without.
The car? It's nothing. Not even the charriots. The wheel? They just cut wood/stuff an a slight different proportion from the center. Nothing you couldn't do with sharpened stones and/or metals. Same with fire, now they call it "lighter"...how fashionable for something that is eternally old and that we have been creating with just two thin lodges, or even shaking stones.
The thing is I like the content, but not being the product. I got upset with Netflix when they announced Quickster and canceled streaming. Then reasoned that I prefer them to Cable companies (I hate the STB and all they tactics, and all the commercials) and signed back. Another way to vote is not buying anything. But that's more like not voting, as in I don't care. I do care and voted for no ads, and no cheats (Cable)
I once decided to start an adventure and live one year in a foreign country I knew nothing about. I was looking for a job, and have every disadvantage: didn't know the culture, the geography, the local brands, companies, uses, names for many things, didn't have friends, a place to live, relatives nor an understanding of the uses and customs. I had visas that expired every year, and that my employer would have to sponsor. But I got a nice job. The deciding factor? I had calculated the CAGR of a revenue series using division and exponentiation as opposed to using the Excel formula.
Why? I once realized I was acting mechanically, and forgetting formulas. So I got a bunch of formulas and asked why was it exactly so, reasoning every angle until I felt I could explain what was going on with natural language. After that, I realized I could think up formulas very easily, including more complicated stuff like combinatorials, statistical series, etc. Of course, I chose to avoid the calculator this one time...one never knows what one will learn :-)