At 6% interest (plus inflation), over 40 years, this $1/week will grow to $8,673. A $2,080 investment will pay itself off 4 times over.
You'll be lucky to get 6% interest. 5% is the usual amount, which is 4% after tax. Take away inflation and you're not left with much. Anyway eight grand over forty years is absolutely nothing. Expecially compared to the millions you could win on the lottery.
Unfortunately, the saying we have in the financial industry is true: "The rich man plans for the next generation. The poor man plans for Friday night."
Of course, major shareholders and CEOs are always looking forty years in advance, not just until the next quarter until they can sell out and screw everyone else over.
You can't escape from taxes, and I'd rather see them spent on NASA than on Iraq.
You're talking as if NASA's funding is syphoned off from Iraq's funding. NASA was soaking up money long before the Iraq war, and will continue to do for long after. All for very little tangible gain, other than non-stick frying pans.
It's estimated that NASA costs the average American tax-payer over $100 a year.
I can do maths, and considering that £1 a week is small enough to effectively be £0 a week, and that several million is enough to retire on comfortably, the odds are infinitely favourable.
Even if most people did have such fast connections, as claimed to exist in other countries, what killer applications are there that would use all that fantastic speed.
Actually they don't turn into money when you shoot them. When you shoot them they disappear and the money they've been given flutters to the ground. There's nothing disturbing or mysogynistic about that.
I'm not remotely mysogynistic but I played DN3D without even giving that a second thought. I suppose if you look for offensive things you'll find them eventually.
The vast majority of people earning or who have earned an MBA do it because it will lead to more money.
Why else would you get a job? If everything was free, no-one would go to work. Getting a qualification in order to make the thing you do to get money more productive at getting money is not a bad thing. In fact it's the sensible route. It's optimisation.
These people are uninteresting. Boring. Status quo.
As opposed to the boring, uninteresting, status quo computer programmers, who do nothing but make boring, interesting status quo software?
It's hard to blame any of them individually for the world's ills, but it's awfully hard to posit that they're part of the solution.
People working harder to be more successful does not contribute to the world's ills. What contributes to the world's ills is people moaning about other people trying to be more successful.
Considering neither the Earth or the Moon have a perfectly flat surface, millimetre-precision reading will only be useful if they know to the millimetre how far away the mirrors are from the centre of the Moon.
A Win98 standalone computer used to log inventory into a warehouse, with automated batch updating of the corporate network by FTP at 0300 every morning, is not going to be replaced by Vista when it is finally no longer up to the task. It might be replaced by a hand-me-down box running WinXP, but it is also very likely to be replaced by a Linux box that will be less expensive to clean up and maintain than a used XP box.
Actually it's more likely to be replaced by an XP box because no-one knows anything about Linux, let alone how to install it and use it. In fact the software that logs the inventory probably doesn't run on Linux at all, and I doubt the OSS programmers have an open source equivalent in the works.
Did you miss the part where I said the software is likely outdated and no longer meets the needs of the organization?
Bullshit. You underestimate how long factories stay exactly the same. The same software can work for decades, it doesn't need updating just because some flash salesman turns up trying to flog all the latest bells and whistles.
If your software could count how many widgets were coming off a production like in 1990, it can do it until 2090 with no changes at all.
If your mission in life is best accomplished at the office, then how can spending your time there be a waste?
If your mission in life is to sit in an office so some CEO can sit on a yacht and decorate private 767s, then that is a sad thing indeed.
Sometimes the best occupation is one that pays poorly or not at all.
If you live in a world where everything is free, yes. It's not a good occupation when the bank repossesses your house and your kid can't go to the dentist when he has toothache.
Internet cafes cost money. Libraries might be inaccessable (too far away). Having to buy proprietary software (i.e. Windows) counts as "requir[ing] special access."
Computers cost money as well, should they just send a video to your house? Oh wait that means having to use a VCR, they should send you one of those too.
I guess I'll finish with: What excactly about US football is equipment bound?
The fact that you need a full set of expensive equipment in order to compete? Try playing in the NFL with the old leather helmets and see how far you get.
The old idea of free amateurs competing together as a symbolic gesture of peace between nations somehow got forgotten somewhere.
Actually the original Olympics involved professional atheletes, and there were no gestures of peace whatsoever. The 'amateur ideal' of the modern Olympics was merely a way for the rich competitors to exclude everyone else. In fact the first few modern Olympics were more like a country club than an actual sporting competition.
Last I looked, gridiron was just one sport of many, and there is nothing stopping anyone making unlicenced games. Just because they have rights to the most popular licences doesn't mean they have a monopoly.
And still far superior to virtually every commercial TV station on the planet.
Except ITV, Channel 4 and Sky. The only things worth watching on the BBC these days are the few sports they still have left.
If you want to pay twice, once in time to watch the useless ad, and twice in money in the increased price of the product to pay for the ad then go right ahead.
You know you still have to pay the increased price of the product even if you don't watch the BBC? You still have to watch ads on the BBC, except they're TV licence adverts like something out of 1984.
I for one have got better things to do with my time.
Like watching twenty year old repeats, and programmes about gardening, selling and buying houses, auctions and ads threatening to fine and prosecute you?
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, major shareholders and CEOs are always looking forty years in advance, not just until the next quarter until they can sell out and screw everyone else over.
It's estimated that NASA costs the average American tax-payer over $100 a year.
So because you're mentally weak, you think you have the right to tell other people what they can and can't do?
I can do maths, and considering that £1 a week is small enough to effectively be £0 a week, and that several million is enough to retire on comfortably, the odds are infinitely favourable.
Porn
Illegal football videos
Applications
Funny foreign commercials
MP3s
Streaming radio/tv
Actually they don't turn into money when you shoot them. When you shoot them they disappear and the money they've been given flutters to the ground. There's nothing disturbing or mysogynistic about that.
I'm not remotely mysogynistic but I played DN3D without even giving that a second thought. I suppose if you look for offensive things you'll find them eventually.
As opposed to the boring, uninteresting, status quo computer programmers, who do nothing but make boring, interesting status quo software?
People working harder to be more successful does not contribute to the world's ills. What contributes to the world's ills is people moaning about other people trying to be more successful.
Considering neither the Earth or the Moon have a perfectly flat surface, millimetre-precision reading will only be useful if they know to the millimetre how far away the mirrors are from the centre of the Moon.
Don't you mean increase the quota?
Have you ever considered that the myspace management care more about what the users want than what the developers want?
Actually it's more likely to be replaced by an XP box because no-one knows anything about Linux, let alone how to install it and use it. In fact the software that logs the inventory probably doesn't run on Linux at all, and I doubt the OSS programmers have an open source equivalent in the works.
Bullshit. You underestimate how long factories stay exactly the same. The same software can work for decades, it doesn't need updating just because some flash salesman turns up trying to flog all the latest bells and whistles.
If your software could count how many widgets were coming off a production like in 1990, it can do it until 2090 with no changes at all.
If you live in a world where everything is free, yes. It's not a good occupation when the bank repossesses your house and your kid can't go to the dentist when he has toothache.
Little Britain.
Dead ringers.
Shame we can't just buy a one-week licence and re-use it every week like they reuse their jokes every week?
Have I got news for you
Hasn't been funny in ten years.
Walking with dinosaurs. No private company would have undertaken such a project.
It's based completely on speculation. And you're wrong with that second statement as ITV have done something that's near identical.
If you're paying 10 cents per kwh, then an added 4 cents is a 40% increase.
So in other words, take your annual electricity bill, add 40%, that's what you're now paying. Just for the 'benefit' of using cow shit.
You need to keep your money in your account in case you need it. If you invest it and suddenly lose your job you're up shit creek.
Football is just one sport of many. You may as well moan that McDonald's has a monopoly on Big Macs.
Last I looked, gridiron was just one sport of many, and there is nothing stopping anyone making unlicenced games. Just because they have rights to the most popular licences doesn't mean they have a monopoly.
So when you're too old to walk, you won't be too old to withstand the forces of falling off a segway?
Shouldn't we wait to see how many people actually buy it before calling it ingenious marketing?
You know you still have to pay the increased price of the product even if you don't watch the BBC? You still have to watch ads on the BBC, except they're TV licence adverts like something out of 1984.
Like watching twenty year old repeats, and programmes about gardening, selling and buying houses, auctions and ads threatening to fine and prosecute you?
But then what about subtitles, menus, extra features etc? Print screen isn't going to get them.