There was 'no direct evidence' that the computer trading in itself increased volatility, it said, but in specific circumstances it was possible for a series of events with 'undesired interactions and outcomes' to occur and cause massive damage."
Or, in other words, "To err is human; to really foul things up requires a computer"
Great idea: throw away the one good reform to ever hit the US patent office; that is, ending the race to the patent office with the first-to-invent system.
don't think it's the sweat that doing it. You (like most people) tie their shoes using a granny knot instead of a reef (or square) knot, resulting in your shoes coming untied easier. Check this for a refresher. Stuff you should know, news for runners (and other people who tie their shoes).
I'm one of those people who is always having their shoelaces come undone. I checked that page and I _am_ doing it right. I tried doing it wrong on purpose (hard to do, as my fingers usually run on automatic), and sure enough the knot bow became angled... but my normal knot is correct.
Dear God, you'll be almost suicidal when you find out they don't know how milk cows or make butter or even such trivial things as weaving wool.
You've got it backwards; making butter and milking cows were the trivial things that every farm child should know (pro tip: do them in the opposite order); weaving always was a specialized task.
People who are bad at managing their money tend to end up living paycheck-to-paycheck and running out of money.
What an amazing coincidence.
A lot of people think it is just coincidence. If you criticize the poor, they will cluck their tongues and suggest you remember that "There but for the grace of God go I."
Use tax in California is comparable to the use taxes employed in 21 other US states (as of 2007).
Compliance is low in the others as well. And the use tax is blatantly unconstitutional, as it is simply an attempt to collect a tax on interstate transactions while pretending to do something else. The courts may turn a blind eye to such things, but I refuse to do so.
It would be great to have smaller, community focused businesses of experts. The experts could leverage the vastness of the internet supply chains to find the best products for their customers. They could provide personalized, expert service for their specific niche. Rather than ordering from Dell and waiting a few days, someone could buy from the local shop and wait a few days while that person builds the best computer available that fits the price point the customer is looking to pay.
The economics of that don't make sense, which is why it doesn't happen. Computers are cheap, actual personalized expert service is expensive.
All of the increasingly more vacant strip malls could come back, each one focused on general niches... electronics, kitchen/cooking, whatever.
Wouldn't happen. Every strip mall would have two nail salons, some sort of craft/kitsch store, a bank (not yours) with a high-fee ATM, and not a damn thing useful.
Liability is nowhere near that simple. There would be a strong case for vicarious liability for an open WiFi, even if it's perfectly legal.
There's no real case for vicarious liability for an open WiFi, because one of the essential elements of vicarious liability -- that the tortfeasor gained financially from the offense -- is missing.
There is already something called the social contract/blockquote Stop right there. The only relevant term of any so-called "social contract" is the universally present "the government may unilaterally change the terms of this agreement at any time or retroactively". The social contract isn't a contract because only one party is at all bound by it; it's just an excuse to impose force.
IANAL but I was under the impression that if you get rid of the physical media you are also supposed to delete any "backup" copies.
There's no right to back up anything but software. So the statutes simply don't have an answer for that; by the plain text of the statutes, if a making a copy for space shifting or for archival purposes is fair use, there's no bar on keeping that copy while destroying or even giving away or reselling the copy it was made from. This is because "keeping" a copy isn't one of the rights reserved to the copyright holder. I give the chance of any court upholding that interpretation at 0.0005%.
The garage parking assistant consists of a tennis ball, a string, and a booklet of warnings about how hanging it should only be done by a skilled professional and to not depend on it as your sole method of parking your car, and you should keep your eyes open at all times while parking, etc.
Exaggerating slightly? The Pirate Party "translates" this:
Adopt the copyright law amendments on injunctive relief against ISPs and a âoeright of informationâ to permit rights holders to obtain the identity of suspected infringers from ISPs in civil cases.
into
Adopt "Three Strikes" making it possible to disconnect prople from the internet without a trial ("injunctive relief"), and implement the IPRED directive in a way that the copyright industry can get internet subscriber identities behind IP addresses (which was not mandatory, my note).
Which simply doesn't translate. The US here is asking for something like the DMCA (which is required by treaty), not for "three strikes" legislation. Also injunctive relief does not mean "without a trial", nor is any disconnection from the internet being demanded here.
It's bad enough without making stuff up.
Further:
Prosecute to the fullest extent the owners of The Pirate Bay. (This doesnâ(TM)t really need translation, except that itâ(TM)s very noteworthy that the executive branch is ordered to interfere with the work of the judicial one, which is illegal in Sweden too.)
I don't know about Sweden, but in the US, prosecution is an executive function.
Second, even by just adding "on a mobile device" to your claims, you're not going to get a patent on a well-known concept. At this point, it's clear that cell phones or other mobile devices are just small computers, so generically performing any well-known CS technique on them is subject to a finding of obviousness.
Aside from your obvious humor, I don't think this would work. On average for every air molecule in the room I'm sitting in moving towards my left there is another air molecule moving to the right at the same speed. On average the net velocity of all the molecules in the room I'm in is zero. And yet, the air molecules in my room don't suddenly all bang into each other coming to a complete stop and then fall to the floor.
They aren't in orbit. And the collisions (which happen all the time; mean free path in air is 68nm) are elastic. Collisions between space junk would be largely inelastic and/or offset, I'd expect, and slowing the junk should push it into a lower orbit where atmospheric drag will slow it further and bring it down.
Which is not to say my idea is practical, just that it's not impractical for that reason.
Send up a rocket full of nuts and bolts and blow it up --- only send it in a retrograde orbit. New space junk hits old space junk, orbital velocities cancel, everything falls and burns up.
Oh, you wanted to keep some of the stuff up there? Sheesh, do I have to think of a solution to everything?
There's an easy dividing line between real engineers and fakers in the United States: it's the Professional Engineer licensing program.
Yep; if you've got it and flaunt it, you're a faker.
The Professional Engineer program is just a licensing program. Engineering has been going on for longer than that, and furthermore there are other professions (including licensed ones) whose practitioners are traditionally called "engineers" which are not included in the Professional Engineering program -- e.g. operating engineers, locomotive engineers.
I've been doing software development professionally (that term means I've been getting paid for it) for about 20 years, much of it with a title including "engineer". If you want to argue software development isn't engineering based on the nature of the work, fine. But to argue it isn't engineering or that I'm not an engineer based on the fact that neither I nor anyone I was working for had some government-recognized stamp of approval from a board of bureaucrats is ridiculous.
Are you suggesting we would be better off as a society if fewer people were seeking more education?
I am. The Masters is becoming the new Bachelors, and the Bachelors was already the new "high school graduate". A Masters degree will soon have no more value in the job market than a high school education had 50-60 years ago. So people are taking an extra 6 years out of their lives (and spending enormous amounts of money) to get to the same place. You could reasonably argue that you get more out of a degree than job market value... but is that value really worth the current price, to most people?
There's a positive feedback loop. Employers use degrees to filter applicants. More applicants thus get degrees. With more people with degrees, other employers who didn't previously use degrees to filter (because they couldn't get enough applicants that way) start doing so. This pushes even more applicants to get degrees. Some employers up the ante by asking for a higher degree; lather, rinse, repeat.
This loop drives demand to colleges up. Which drives prices up. Which drives political demand for college aid (including loans) up. The availability of loans drives demand to colleges up, which drives prices up more. Another positive feedback loop.
There's another aspect which pushes down the quality of education as well as the value: Faced with more applicants with the ability to pay, some colleges may lower admissions standards and/or course difficulty to accomodate those applicants and get their money. This then drives the first loop of higher degrees needed for employment.
So the current situation results in ever-increasing requirements for education of higher cost and lower quality.
But we live in a Free Market Wonderland. The invisible hand should direct that qualified applicants get more money until the problem is solved. So, no problem, just as he said. Right?
But it's not a free-market wonderland. The capital can move far more easily than the labor. So the capital moves to where the engineers are cheaper.
Six months ago Khadaffy and his government were the darlings of the civilized world.
Speaking for the decadent and barbaric United States, I will say WE have consistently hated the bastard for quite a while. I suspect you'll find the UK did as well.
On one hand, I cannot believe Google is doing this.
Good call. That's because it's a fib.
See in the summary where it says "Google has admitted that deleting a G+ account will seriously downgrade your other Google services."?
Here's what the quoted link actually says:
But if you cancel your Google account, is your ability to comment on Picasa photos still intact, for example?
Google: There are two scenarios. In the first scenario, you elect to disable Google+ by downgrading your Google+ account. Products like Picasa, Reader, and Buzz will revert to the same state they were in before you upgraded to Google+. So yes, you can still comment on photos in Picasa.
In the second scenario you elect to disable Google+ by downgrading your Google+ account while your your Google+ profile is suspended due to a common names violation. What should happen is the same as the first scenario: you should be able to use Picasa, Reader and Buzz as before. We're aware of a bug that currently prevents the use of some social features in those products and we're working to address it soon.
In both scenarios, downgrading from Google+ will have no effect on other Google services like Gmail, Docs, etc.
Quite different, aren't they?
As for the "identity service" thing, I rather suspect that the writer of the blog (who spelled "billed" as "build", which should give you some idea of his level of care) has mistaken "identity service" for "identified service", as described here
Slashdot Mirror
Or, in other words, "To err is human; to really foul things up requires a computer"
Great idea: throw away the one good reform to ever hit the US patent office; that is, ending the race to the patent office with the first-to-invent system.
I'm one of those people who is always having their shoelaces come undone. I checked that page and I _am_ doing it right. I tried doing it wrong on purpose (hard to do, as my fingers usually run on automatic), and sure enough the knot bow became angled... but my normal knot is correct.
You've got it backwards; making butter and milking cows were the trivial things that every farm child should know (pro tip: do them in the opposite order); weaving always was a specialized task.
While I don't mind hovering over ball lightning either, I'm curious as to why you didn't consider diamagnetic levitation.
A lot of people think it is just coincidence. If you criticize the poor, they will cluck their tongues and suggest you remember that "There but for the grace of God go I."
Compliance is low in the others as well. And the use tax is blatantly unconstitutional, as it is simply an attempt to collect a tax on interstate transactions while pretending to do something else. The courts may turn a blind eye to such things, but I refuse to do so.
The economics of that don't make sense, which is why it doesn't happen. Computers are cheap, actual personalized expert service is expensive.
Wouldn't happen. Every strip mall would have two nail salons, some sort of craft/kitsch store, a bank (not yours) with a high-fee ATM, and not a damn thing useful.
There's no real case for vicarious liability for an open WiFi, because one of the essential elements of vicarious liability -- that the tortfeasor gained financially from the offense -- is missing.
There's no right to back up anything but software. So the statutes simply don't have an answer for that; by the plain text of the statutes, if a making a copy for space shifting or for archival purposes is fair use, there's no bar on keeping that copy while destroying or even giving away or reselling the copy it was made from. This is because "keeping" a copy isn't one of the rights reserved to the copyright holder. I give the chance of any court upholding that interpretation at 0.0005%.
The garage parking assistant consists of a tennis ball, a string, and a booklet of warnings about how hanging it should only be done by a skilled professional and to not depend on it as your sole method of parking your car, and you should keep your eyes open at all times while parking, etc.
into
Which simply doesn't translate. The US here is asking for something like the DMCA (which is required by treaty), not for "three strikes" legislation. Also injunctive relief does not mean "without a trial", nor is any disconnection from the internet being demanded here. It's bad enough without making stuff up. Further:
I don't know about Sweden, but in the US, prosecution is an executive function.
Ha ha ha. Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
They aren't in orbit. And the collisions (which happen all the time; mean free path in air is 68nm) are elastic. Collisions between space junk would be largely inelastic and/or offset, I'd expect, and slowing the junk should push it into a lower orbit where atmospheric drag will slow it further and bring it down.
Which is not to say my idea is practical, just that it's not impractical for that reason.
Send up a rocket full of nuts and bolts and blow it up --- only send it in a retrograde orbit. New space junk hits old space junk, orbital velocities cancel, everything falls and burns up.
Oh, you wanted to keep some of the stuff up there? Sheesh, do I have to think of a solution to everything?
Yep; if you've got it and flaunt it, you're a faker.
The Professional Engineer program is just a licensing program. Engineering has been going on for longer than that, and furthermore there are other professions (including licensed ones) whose practitioners are traditionally called "engineers" which are not included in the Professional Engineering program -- e.g. operating engineers, locomotive engineers.
I've been doing software development professionally (that term means I've been getting paid for it) for about 20 years, much of it with a title including "engineer". If you want to argue software development isn't engineering based on the nature of the work, fine. But to argue it isn't engineering or that I'm not an engineer based on the fact that neither I nor anyone I was working for had some government-recognized stamp of approval from a board of bureaucrats is ridiculous.
Cars aren't shipped in shipping containers, at least not by the major exporters; they have specialized ships for moving them.
I think that if the education isn't required nor even particularly helpful to the job, it is a bad thing.
The main downside is the time it takes for them to get the degree. Which, if they didn't want it, would be time spent doing other things.
I am. The Masters is becoming the new Bachelors, and the Bachelors was already the new "high school graduate". A Masters degree will soon have no more value in the job market than a high school education had 50-60 years ago. So people are taking an extra 6 years out of their lives (and spending enormous amounts of money) to get to the same place. You could reasonably argue that you get more out of a degree than job market value... but is that value really worth the current price, to most people?
There's a positive feedback loop. Employers use degrees to filter applicants. More applicants thus get degrees. With more people with degrees, other employers who didn't previously use degrees to filter (because they couldn't get enough applicants that way) start doing so. This pushes even more applicants to get degrees. Some employers up the ante by asking for a higher degree; lather, rinse, repeat.
This loop drives demand to colleges up. Which drives prices up. Which drives political demand for college aid (including loans) up. The availability of loans drives demand to colleges up, which drives prices up more. Another positive feedback loop.
There's another aspect which pushes down the quality of education as well as the value: Faced with more applicants with the ability to pay, some colleges may lower admissions standards and/or course difficulty to accomodate those applicants and get their money. This then drives the first loop of higher degrees needed for employment.
So the current situation results in ever-increasing requirements for education of higher cost and lower quality.
But it's not a free-market wonderland. The capital can move far more easily than the labor. So the capital moves to where the engineers are cheaper.
The one I found isn't a DMCA notice, it's a C&D to the owner of the site, not the ISP. But it pretends to be a DMCA notice.
Speaking for the decadent and barbaric United States, I will say WE have consistently hated the bastard for quite a while. I suspect you'll find the UK did as well.
Right. Because torrent trackers have NEVER been known to include bogus IP addresses which weren't connected.
Good call. That's because it's a fib.
See in the summary where it says "Google has admitted that deleting a G+ account will seriously downgrade your other Google services."?
Here's what the quoted link actually says:
Quite different, aren't they?
As for the "identity service" thing, I rather suspect that the writer of the blog (who spelled "billed" as "build", which should give you some idea of his level of care) has mistaken "identity service" for "identified service", as described here