The hair dryer I like, but the distilled water will help oxidization (rust), so I'd use some kind of cleaning alcohol instead (barring alcohol, then use distilled water only as a last resort).
Strong alcohol won't remove a lot of water-soluble contaminants; water and/or a water based solvent is required. You can then rinse with alcohol to dry it faster.
Microsoft may have picked up the phrase "mac tax" lately, but generations upon generations of Usenet trolls have use the term. So they didn't even innovate that, unless they're behind the trolls.
People often criticise Microsoft for putting money first. There's a popular bible quote, "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?"
If you accept that, then logically (yet disturbingly), the most profitable course of action is to collect souls. That seems to be Apple and Google's business plan.
Another (less-disturbing) way of reading it implies that the most profitable course of action is to gain the whole world without losing one's own soul. That is, one's soul is valuable only to oneself, but without it, nothing else has value.
The best thing about the keyboards is the back-lighting
Meh. I have it on my MBPro, and I never use it. It's cool, but is it useful? I've been using computer keyboards for long enough that I know where yjr lrud str/
If fields of science still use AT&T UNIX, then they need to have a wake up call and update their OS and supported hardware to something newer, like FreeBSD 7, Linux or OpenSolaris.
While there probably are a few dinosaurs out there still running stuff on a 3B2, even the Unix trademark isn't restricted to AT&T Unix.
...5...4...3...2...1
A state judge rules that state officials have the right to take domain names registered elsewhere and belonging to organizations based elsewhere? This one is not staying in the state courts.
Yeah, religions just can't take a joke. Imagine the outrage from fundie christians if there was a burning cross or something in it. It'd get banned in the US.
It wouldn't be the fundies complaining about the burning cross, it'd be the NAACP.
And there already has been an album cover with a burning cross on it published in the US, Marilyn Manson's "Last Tour on Earth". It's likely not the only one, either.
Pete Seeger and The Byrds are recalling all copies of "Turn! Turn! Turn! (to Everything There is a Season)", because somehow or another parts of the Bible got into it. Search your old vinyl and ship it back!
Any lawyers reading want to comment on Massachusetts's attempt to impose this regulation on any business (even one without a presence in Massachusetts) storing information about Massachusetts residents? My take on this is that they are WAY overstepping the boundaries of what state laws can do, but IANAL.
The judge will decide whether the demand for the key is legitimate. The judge will decide whether it is reasonable to believe you can produce it.
Not in a criminal case in the US. (Probably in the UK it's different, but they've pretty much reached 1984 there). The cops can get a search warrant to look for your key (or your gun, or your wife's body), but they can't put you in jail until you tell them where said key, gun, or body is. That's part of the privilege against self incrimination.
I hate to say it, but Clinton is right. It wasn't commercial bank forays into securities which brought the 13 (14 if you count Wachovia) banks down this year -- it was ordinary bad mortgage lending. Glass-Steagall wouldn't prevent that. Nor would it prevent the banks from obtaining mortgage guarantees; in fact, Fannie Mae was created as a governemnt agency in the 1930s to do just that. The institutions which have failed due to exposure to derivatives have been investment banks, which, again, Glass-Steagall would not have prevented. And, as he points out, Glass-Steagall would have prevented the sale of Merril Lynch (an investment bank) to Bank of America (a commercial bank).
Makes me wonder though: assuming 1 to 1 ratios, single women should be just as common as single men (actually a little more common since females are slightly more common than males regarding birthrates). It's either the technology/concept behind it that's scaring them off, higher standards, or perhaps women are just more content to go it alone in life than men.
Or perhaps far more men are involved with multiple women than vice-versa.
Once financial institutions are required to make subprime and interest-only mortgages available and since they're going to have a higher default rate than conventionial mortgages, then it's a game of Hot Potato. How do you get rid of them before they default?
That's not necessarily the case. You can make subprime loans available without playing Hot Potato, but you need to estimate the risks properly and set the interest rates accordingly. This probably isn't true of so-called "liars loans", but not all subrime loans were of that variety.
Simple, bundle them with other mortgages and sell them to other financial institutions, last one to hold them when the bubble bursts is the loser.
If you didn't want these turkeys, why would the other financial institutions want them, unless you sold them at a discount reflecting their risk? Without the buyer committing a fundamental error in figuring their risk, you can't get rid of them that way.
Fancy financial instruments - which replaced sound risk management and created the current mess where nobody truly knows where the bad loans are.
People like to blame the fancy financial instruments because they're somewhat complicated and hard for the average Joe to understand (thus easy for the average politician to blame). But mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps have been around for a long time, and they're really not all _that_ complicated; any geek worth his salt should be able to understand them. The problem associated with the mortgage backed securities is that somehow they were rated as low risk despite the fact that the mortgages backing them were steaming high-risk piles of crap. Figure out why that was and you're halfway to solving the credit crisis.
Whoever you want to blame: "greedy" banks who made "irresponsible" loans (yeah, who ELSE were they going to loan the money to? There were no more buyers able to afford homes at those prices),
If they hadn't loaned the money, the prices would not have stayed high, because there would have been no buyers. If other bankers had loaned the money, it is those other bankers who would have been left holding the bag when the bubble burst. (in fact, this is what happened -- not every bank made these bad loans; you don't hear much about the ones which didn't, because they're not failing).
The housing bubble was largely caused by the availability of these subprime mortgages. One can argue all day about which came first, but the fact of the matter is that if house asking prices had risen to unaffordable levels and banks had not made these crazy loans available, simple supply and demand would have pushed housing prices right back down.
Guess what folks - we're still not at the bottom, despite being very near post-dot com bust lows. As a trader I watched the Dow drop 700 points in 5 minutes on Friday, only to bounce back positive, and then plunge again. [...]Government interference in this correction will only serve to bankrupt an already insolvent US government, and destroy the US dollar's desirability on world markets.
I'm buying in now. If what you say is true, it doesn't matter whether I buy into stocks or keep the money in cash, after all; both will be equally worthless. Buying Euros, Pounds, CAD, NZD, AUD, Yen, R.O.K Won, Indian rupees, or Chinese Yuan won't help either because the economies of those countries are too tied into the US. Perhaps P.R.K Won and the Russian Ruble are the currencies of choice (but I doubt it)...
The Inventor(s) of Mortgage Backed Securities [...] Should be found and put on trial immediately. ]
They were invented in 1938... by the US government, which created an agency called the National Mortgage Association of Washington (later the Federal National Mortgage Association -- Fannie Mae) to issue them. I think you'll find the actual people who came up with them are mostly dead or in their dotage by now.
In any case, there's nothing wrong with the concept of a mortgage-backed security. Problems occur when the mortgages backing them are crap, and yet the security is still rated as high quality.
I think pretty much noone thinks that making money of other peoples work is ok(main purpose of copyright is after all making sure the money(if any) goes to the right person).
Making money off of other people's work is fine, and pretty much every person in the so-called creative industries believes it. How many times has a large part of old Bill Shakespeare's work made it into something new (and he wasn't 100% original either). How much visual art references or incorporates older visual art, usually without compensation?
The obvious point is that he is still championing change, while most of us just sit on our butts and complain. Regardless of our views on just how much more change should be ushered in, you have to respect his efforts.
How much have we gotten done to knock copyright law down to size, sitting on our butts and complaining? Nothing, right. How much has Lessig gotten done to knock copyright law down to size, championing change as he has? Same nothing. So the only real difference is he's put out a lot more effort for the same lack of result.
Wasn't this settled, oh, a DECADE ago, when some simulations showed that yes, there could be naked singularities formed? It doesn't matter how many scenarios don't create one, if one scenario does, then the theory allows for it (whether the real universe does or not).
Weakest level of paranoia: No network drivers
Next level: No video drivers or keyboard drivers
Next level: panics on boot
Final level: erases the hard drive then bricks the box
The fundamental problem is a looming lack of labor resources brought on be the desire of the baby-boomers to retire. Once someone retires, they began taking from the economy rather than giving to it. This was always fine since there were many more paying into it than taking out of it. However, the ratio of those producing to those consuming is shrinking and continuing to shrink.
We HAD a perfectly good solution to that, but the anti-smokers ruined it.
Slashdot Mirror
Strong alcohol won't remove a lot of water-soluble contaminants; water and/or a water based solvent is required. You can then rinse with alcohol to dry it faster.
Microsoft may have picked up the phrase "mac tax" lately, but generations upon generations of Usenet trolls have use the term. So they didn't even innovate that, unless they're behind the trolls.
Another (less-disturbing) way of reading it implies that the most profitable course of action is to gain the whole world without losing one's own soul. That is, one's soul is valuable only to oneself, but without it, nothing else has value.
Meh. I have it on my MBPro, and I never use it. It's cool, but is it useful? I've been using computer keyboards for long enough that I know where yjr lrud str/
While there probably are a few dinosaurs out there still running stuff on a 3B2, even the Unix trademark isn't restricted to AT&T Unix.
And two extra pounds. Still one extra pound if you compare to the 15" MacBook Pro instead. Try again, that laptop is in a different weight class.
...5...4...3...2...1 A state judge rules that state officials have the right to take domain names registered elsewhere and belonging to organizations based elsewhere? This one is not staying in the state courts.
It wouldn't be the fundies complaining about the burning cross, it'd be the NAACP. And there already has been an album cover with a burning cross on it published in the US, Marilyn Manson's "Last Tour on Earth". It's likely not the only one, either.
Pete Seeger and The Byrds are recalling all copies of "Turn! Turn! Turn! (to Everything There is a Season)", because somehow or another parts of the Bible got into it. Search your old vinyl and ship it back!
Any lawyers reading want to comment on Massachusetts's attempt to impose this regulation on any business (even one without a presence in Massachusetts) storing information about Massachusetts residents? My take on this is that they are WAY overstepping the boundaries of what state laws can do, but IANAL.
Not in a criminal case in the US. (Probably in the UK it's different, but they've pretty much reached 1984 there). The cops can get a search warrant to look for your key (or your gun, or your wife's body), but they can't put you in jail until you tell them where said key, gun, or body is. That's part of the privilege against self incrimination.
Intercal
Brainfuck
Whitespace
Robotwar
Loglan
Proto-Indo-European
I hate to say it, but Clinton is right. It wasn't commercial bank forays into securities which brought the 13 (14 if you count Wachovia) banks down this year -- it was ordinary bad mortgage lending. Glass-Steagall wouldn't prevent that. Nor would it prevent the banks from obtaining mortgage guarantees; in fact, Fannie Mae was created as a governemnt agency in the 1930s to do just that. The institutions which have failed due to exposure to derivatives have been investment banks, which, again, Glass-Steagall would not have prevented. And, as he points out, Glass-Steagall would have prevented the sale of Merril Lynch (an investment bank) to Bank of America (a commercial bank).
But it's pronounced "Windows Vee-Eye-Eye".
Or perhaps far more men are involved with multiple women than vice-versa.
That's not necessarily the case. You can make subprime loans available without playing Hot Potato, but you need to estimate the risks properly and set the interest rates accordingly. This probably isn't true of so-called "liars loans", but not all subrime loans were of that variety.
If you didn't want these turkeys, why would the other financial institutions want them, unless you sold them at a discount reflecting their risk? Without the buyer committing a fundamental error in figuring their risk, you can't get rid of them that way.
People like to blame the fancy financial instruments because they're somewhat complicated and hard for the average Joe to understand (thus easy for the average politician to blame). But mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps have been around for a long time, and they're really not all _that_ complicated; any geek worth his salt should be able to understand them. The problem associated with the mortgage backed securities is that somehow they were rated as low risk despite the fact that the mortgages backing them were steaming high-risk piles of crap. Figure out why that was and you're halfway to solving the credit crisis.
If they hadn't loaned the money, the prices would not have stayed high, because there would have been no buyers. If other bankers had loaned the money, it is those other bankers who would have been left holding the bag when the bubble burst. (in fact, this is what happened -- not every bank made these bad loans; you don't hear much about the ones which didn't, because they're not failing).
The housing bubble was largely caused by the availability of these subprime mortgages. One can argue all day about which came first, but the fact of the matter is that if house asking prices had risen to unaffordable levels and banks had not made these crazy loans available, simple supply and demand would have pushed housing prices right back down.
I'm buying in now. If what you say is true, it doesn't matter whether I buy into stocks or keep the money in cash, after all; both will be equally worthless. Buying Euros, Pounds, CAD, NZD, AUD, Yen, R.O.K Won, Indian rupees, or Chinese Yuan won't help either because the economies of those countries are too tied into the US. Perhaps P.R.K Won and the Russian Ruble are the currencies of choice (but I doubt it)...
They were invented in 1938... by the US government, which created an agency called the National Mortgage Association of Washington (later the Federal National Mortgage Association -- Fannie Mae) to issue them. I think you'll find the actual people who came up with them are mostly dead or in their dotage by now. In any case, there's nothing wrong with the concept of a mortgage-backed security. Problems occur when the mortgages backing them are crap, and yet the security is still rated as high quality.
Making money off of other people's work is fine, and pretty much every person in the so-called creative industries believes it. How many times has a large part of old Bill Shakespeare's work made it into something new (and he wasn't 100% original either). How much visual art references or incorporates older visual art, usually without compensation?
How much have we gotten done to knock copyright law down to size, sitting on our butts and complaining? Nothing, right. How much has Lessig gotten done to knock copyright law down to size, championing change as he has? Same nothing. So the only real difference is he's put out a lot more effort for the same lack of result.
Wasn't this settled, oh, a DECADE ago, when some simulations showed that yes, there could be naked singularities formed? It doesn't matter how many scenarios don't create one, if one scenario does, then the theory allows for it (whether the real universe does or not).
NYT story on naked singularity bet
(Research on this comment consisted of one query to google, keywords "naked singularity")
BTW, "naked black hole" is a contradiction in terms. A naked singularity is, by definition, not a black hole.
Only on financial services companies.
Besides, you don't need short selling to profit from stuff like this. Spread your rumor, buy, and sell when the rumor is discredited.
Weakest level of paranoia: No network drivers Next level: No video drivers or keyboard drivers Next level: panics on boot Final level: erases the hard drive then bricks the box
We HAD a perfectly good solution to that, but the anti-smokers ruined it.