So, which coal plant owners are getting fined and jailed "the shit out of" for spewing mercury and other radioactive elements into the air? What about their and the natural gas plant owners' carbon dioxide? What about all those superfund sites where the owners danced away to happy graves and their grandkids are still spending the money? What about the company in West Virginia that just declared bankruptcy to get out from all the lawsuits about their leaking chemicals? Even if the company is shut down - and it probably will be - the investors' money will all be protected to start up a new similar business to take its place.
Frankly, in a few seconds, I can come up with dozens of relevant examples that completely refute your claims, sorry.
Lines of code I've written in HDL execute in hardware once every clock cycle, at, say 100 MHz on maybe 50,000 devices for at least a few years of active use each. That's like 3x10^20 executions alone, and I work for a specialty hardware company which has only sold ~50,000 devices I've designed over the past 13+ years. I'm quite certain other hardware developers have far, far more, and the original question doesn't necessarily seem to require code that executes in a processor versus inferring hardware.
(And yes, there's one file that I've conveyed from project to project for everything I've designed. It generates a 100 ns time base - a one-clock-cycle-wide pulse every 100 ns - regardless of the clock frequency. It adds a little jitter to synchronize to the time base but makes it easier to change the clock frequency without breaking other real-time dependent timers.)
It's not just free speech, but the meaning of freedom of the press, as that is called out as a separate "line item" if you will in the first amendment. What does that mean in a context distinct from speech? In the rare situation that circumstances make it impossible for everyone to be in a given location - for example, in a courtroom, on Air Force One, etc. - it makes sense to designate a "pool reporter" to take that spot in exchange for agreeing to share the information with everyone else. Often it's likely that the spot will be reserved for the pool reporter, because it ensures that a wide variety of media outlets have access to the information.
In that way, for example, some press might get preferential treatment over other press. On the other hand, if a large group of bloggers wanted to get together and make a pool for reporting on things like that, I suspect their pool reporter would also get similar preferential treatment.
Also, consider places like crime scenes where police used to* allow designated members of the media closer access than the "general public". While any given member of that public could tweet or publish an Instagram and suddenly be a journalist, the police officers may be willing to give a little more leniency to someone they know personally or by reputation as someone who won't get in their way. *I say "used to" because with rulings like these, maybe they won't do this any more, but also with the increased militarization and adversarial nature of police forces, they may be as equally likely to lash out at a "member of the press" as they seem regularly to at the general public.
The lot to our south is empty, and according to long-time residents of the neighborhood, has been since the 1960s. At the time, an old lady lived in a little house there, and it blew up due to a gas leak. The property is still owned by the lady's daughter. No idea why she's never sold it or built on it again.
The only DMV on a bus line in Austin was closed for the past two years or so, with a sign directing all customers to an annex in Pflugerville that isn't served by any public transportation. I have to imagine it was rather difficult to travel 20 miles out of central town if you didn't have a ride, whether you were seeking a driver's license or the identification card required now for non-drivers to vote. The DMV in central Austin finally opened again a few weeks ago.
Err - take them with you? If your new place doesn't have them, bring the incandescent bulbs back and swap them out at your old place. If your new place does, then you don't need to take them with you anyway.
You mean like, if you're in fear for your life, don't chase the kid through the neighborhood? It appears that, in Florida, you can instigate up to the second you fear for your life, then you are justified in shooting.
"...but, but, that was like two minutes earlier. Way back then, the shooter felt safe enough to return to the area. Only later did the situation change and he became suitably concerned for his own safety to open fire."
This happened in Florida, and my quote above is pretty much the defense that got George Zimmerman off the hook for murder in Florida. As far as I can tell, in Florida, you can instigate all the way up to the second when the other person fights back, then you can shoot them and be legally justified in doing so.
I'm surprised that we haven't started seeing duels in the street down there. After all, whichever person lives can claim that the other guy was gonna shoot him, and so he had to shoot first. The fact they both pre-arranged to stand there 10 paces apart is in the past and irrelevant.
That's akin to saying that the constitution allows for free speech, but not for the pre-requisite air.
The thing is, it doesn't, at least not in the opinions of many people. All those folks who like to blather on about negative rights rarely bring up the fact that, without strong and well-enforced environmental regulation, the air we breath, the water we drink, the food we eat, and the land upon which we live can be contaminated to the point that it will not sustain healthy life, and all of that is okay because air, water, food, shelter, and health don't fall into the category of negative rights, but are instead positive rights that restrict (often unfairly, in these people's minds) the rights of others.
In other words, I'm talking about the type of people who like to talk about natural rights like freedom of speech, worship, ownership, but hate the idea of government restrictions on what they do with their land, their air, or their water, even those these are all commons that are shared with the community at large.
A person who both supports natural and negative rights but sees strong environmental protections as important to protect those rights is a rare person, indeed.
If you buy a network interface card then you have to include a connector for that card on your motherboard, and have the necessary chips to talk whatever protocol is used on that bus. Which also means you have to buy or design a motherboard - and designing one probably makes sense when costs and form factor matter and you have sufficient economies of scale.
If you're designing a motherboard, you might as well just buy the ethernet chip and put it on yourself. The chip doesn't come with a built-in MAC address; that's provided from flash (or some other nonvolatile storage device on board). Whoever programs the flash (or pays the CM to program the flash) provides it with a MAC address, not the vendor of the ethernet chip itself.
My employer designs products with built-in ethernet and we have our own MAC address range(s).
Sometimes the correct answer to a question is one the asker doesn't want to hear.
This is the correct answer. Guy should give his mom a tablet for Christmas, for "when you'd rather sit on the sofa than at the computer desk". Six months later, either he'll find it's never used (which means he's just out some money) or that she uses it exclusively (which means the problem is solved, as she's now adapted to another OS - acceptable because it's "on a tablet" instead of another PC OS).
Tablets are what parents should have been getting in 2000-2005 instead of all the PCs that were used instead, if only they had existed in non-suck forms.
It's done in all new developments, of course, but the cost of running the initial conduits in built-out neighborhoods is tremendous, with little to no return on the investment.
Heck, my street doesn't have curbs and we were annexed into Austin in 1941. (Not that I mind this, by the way.)
Oh, of course, some people will come up with something that will sell worldwide, be crazy successful, and can retire off of one thing. But those are outliers, even in today's market more the exception than the norm, and they aren't really the top of this conversation.
I don't know what it's like to work for an ad agency, and have to come up with new campaigns or slogans all the time. Nor do I know what it's like to be a comedy writer and work in a script-writing room year after year. And yet there are people who do those things, and do them well, for years and years. Maybe they burn out eventually? Maybe, and when they do they find another job, they don't expect the government to hand them profit for the rest of their lives, no matter how popular that car insurance jingle used to be.
Too early to detect sarcasm... Paypal wasn't an Ebay innovation, that's like thanking AOL for for Winamp. Really, in what market is Ebay still a rival of Amazon ?
Well, because of this article, I'm going to look into the fees charged for selling on Amazon. I have piles of random things (board games, sterling silverware, and camera equipment right now) that I pick up somewhere and resell, but if I could do it will fewer fees on Amazon, I'll look at it.
If five people are only able to produce one "hit" in a given year, and the hit fades so fast that it doesn't earn residual income in future years, then maybe they're in the wrong profession? Maybe fire the three that don't write music or lyrics and bring in three more creative types who can both write and play? That would result in more overall hits and more money for all of them. Or maybe the one creative guy should hire studio musicians for the other four spots, only have to pay them $1000 each once to make the recording, and then pocket the other $36,000 for himself.
My understanding is that yes, they get paid for it, which is why (on Pandora at least) you can't skip more than X songs per hour. (Or at least you couldn't in 2008, back when I was training my station. I rarely skip anything now since it plays exactly what I want to hear at work barring the occasional new song that doesn't quite fit.)
Well, one reasonably popular song per album (instead of ten) is the fault of the artist, not the fans. A professional musician needs to be able to work 40 hour weeks for 40 years, just like other professionals, and save for retirement, all while producing work that people want to buy. If they can't do that in their chosen profession, they need to find another profession, and give up music or treat it as a hobby.
(Yes, this is true for plenty of creativity-based professions too.)
$3800 for what amounts to a few weeks writing a song and coming up with accompanying music, recording it, and getting it post edited doesn't sound so bad, especially since they also made money from other streaming sites, CD sales, live performances of that song, T-shirts and posters sold because people like that song, etc.
What do they expect, to be able to retire off one "hit"? If they want to be a professional musician, they need to put in 40 hour weeks for 40 years and save for retirement, just like every other professional. If they're not able to be creative like that, maybe a creative profession isn't suited for them.
Or maybe, given that iDevices entered the market before Android, those that bought into the Apple ecosystem are further along the post-PC chain, and therefore more comfortable overall with using full-featured mobile devices compared to those who entered the market later.
I know I've been reading this article on my phone, despite being able to touch my laptop with my toes. When my phone dies (it's low) or if I want to buy something, I'm more likely to grab my tablet sitting in arm's reach than grab the laptop.
Slashdot Mirror
So, which coal plant owners are getting fined and jailed "the shit out of" for spewing mercury and other radioactive elements into the air? What about their and the natural gas plant owners' carbon dioxide? What about all those superfund sites where the owners danced away to happy graves and their grandkids are still spending the money? What about the company in West Virginia that just declared bankruptcy to get out from all the lawsuits about their leaking chemicals? Even if the company is shut down - and it probably will be - the investors' money will all be protected to start up a new similar business to take its place.
Frankly, in a few seconds, I can come up with dozens of relevant examples that completely refute your claims, sorry.
Lines of code I've written in HDL execute in hardware once every clock cycle, at, say 100 MHz on maybe 50,000 devices for at least a few years of active use each. That's like 3x10^20 executions alone, and I work for a specialty hardware company which has only sold ~50,000 devices I've designed over the past 13+ years. I'm quite certain other hardware developers have far, far more, and the original question doesn't necessarily seem to require code that executes in a processor versus inferring hardware.
(And yes, there's one file that I've conveyed from project to project for everything I've designed. It generates a 100 ns time base - a one-clock-cycle-wide pulse every 100 ns - regardless of the clock frequency. It adds a little jitter to synchronize to the time base but makes it easier to change the clock frequency without breaking other real-time dependent timers.)
It's not just free speech, but the meaning of freedom of the press, as that is called out as a separate "line item" if you will in the first amendment. What does that mean in a context distinct from speech? In the rare situation that circumstances make it impossible for everyone to be in a given location - for example, in a courtroom, on Air Force One, etc. - it makes sense to designate a "pool reporter" to take that spot in exchange for agreeing to share the information with everyone else. Often it's likely that the spot will be reserved for the pool reporter, because it ensures that a wide variety of media outlets have access to the information.
In that way, for example, some press might get preferential treatment over other press. On the other hand, if a large group of bloggers wanted to get together and make a pool for reporting on things like that, I suspect their pool reporter would also get similar preferential treatment.
Also, consider places like crime scenes where police used to* allow designated members of the media closer access than the "general public". While any given member of that public could tweet or publish an Instagram and suddenly be a journalist, the police officers may be willing to give a little more leniency to someone they know personally or by reputation as someone who won't get in their way. *I say "used to" because with rulings like these, maybe they won't do this any more, but also with the increased militarization and adversarial nature of police forces, they may be as equally likely to lash out at a "member of the press" as they seem regularly to at the general public.
The lot to our south is empty, and according to long-time residents of the neighborhood, has been since the 1960s. At the time, an old lady lived in a little house there, and it blew up due to a gas leak. The property is still owned by the lady's daughter. No idea why she's never sold it or built on it again.
There was a similar explosion a neighborhood over a few years ago. The burnt out frame remnants of this house are still there, behind the chain link fence. The house next door (on one side) was knocked a foot off its foundation and is still there, condemned. The house on the other side was fine because there was a row of trees between them to disrupt the force of the explosion. The only thing they've done to the site besides the fence was haul away the metal hulk of his car, I presume to recycle.
http://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/crews-battle-north-austin-house-fire
http://www.kvue.com/news/local/Two-injured-in-North-Austin-home-explosion-136939943.html
http://www.kvue.com/news/Family-of-Austin-man-killed-in-gas-explosion-suing-Texas-Gas-Service-141829703.html
Here's the google street view, still showing the house almost two years later:
http://goo.gl/maps/mk8ck
And here's basically what it still looked like the last time I drove past:
http://media.kvue.com/images/459*264/9JessExplosion011012.jpg
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/lt/lt_cache/thumbnail/960/img/photos/2012/09/22/ed/61/020412gas_1323574a.jpg
The only DMV on a bus line in Austin was closed for the past two years or so, with a sign directing all customers to an annex in Pflugerville that isn't served by any public transportation. I have to imagine it was rather difficult to travel 20 miles out of central town if you didn't have a ride, whether you were seeking a driver's license or the identification card required now for non-drivers to vote. The DMV in central Austin finally opened again a few weeks ago.
The most egregious abuses of private-sector power involve destruction or contamination of the commons.
Err - take them with you? If your new place doesn't have them, bring the incandescent bulbs back and swap them out at your old place. If your new place does, then you don't need to take them with you anyway.
You mean like, if you're in fear for your life, don't chase the kid through the neighborhood? It appears that, in Florida, you can instigate up to the second you fear for your life, then you are justified in shooting.
"...but, but, that was like two minutes earlier. Way back then, the shooter felt safe enough to return to the area. Only later did the situation change and he became suitably concerned for his own safety to open fire."
This happened in Florida, and my quote above is pretty much the defense that got George Zimmerman off the hook for murder in Florida. As far as I can tell, in Florida, you can instigate all the way up to the second when the other person fights back, then you can shoot them and be legally justified in doing so.
I'm surprised that we haven't started seeing duels in the street down there. After all, whichever person lives can claim that the other guy was gonna shoot him, and so he had to shoot first. The fact they both pre-arranged to stand there 10 paces apart is in the past and irrelevant.
---
This post is dripping with sarcasm and sadness.
That's akin to saying that the constitution allows for free speech, but not for the pre-requisite air.
The thing is, it doesn't, at least not in the opinions of many people. All those folks who like to blather on about negative rights rarely bring up the fact that, without strong and well-enforced environmental regulation, the air we breath, the water we drink, the food we eat, and the land upon which we live can be contaminated to the point that it will not sustain healthy life, and all of that is okay because air, water, food, shelter, and health don't fall into the category of negative rights, but are instead positive rights that restrict (often unfairly, in these people's minds) the rights of others.
In other words, I'm talking about the type of people who like to talk about natural rights like freedom of speech, worship, ownership, but hate the idea of government restrictions on what they do with their land, their air, or their water, even those these are all commons that are shared with the community at large.
A person who both supports natural and negative rights but sees strong environmental protections as important to protect those rights is a rare person, indeed.
Yes.
But, other than the lens, digital and film photography are completely different technologies, so Kodak had no significant advantages.
Except, of course, that they developed the first digital camera and so could have had both first-to-market benefits and a head start on further R&D.
If you buy a network interface card then you have to include a connector for that card on your motherboard, and have the necessary chips to talk whatever protocol is used on that bus. Which also means you have to buy or design a motherboard - and designing one probably makes sense when costs and form factor matter and you have sufficient economies of scale.
If you're designing a motherboard, you might as well just buy the ethernet chip and put it on yourself. The chip doesn't come with a built-in MAC address; that's provided from flash (or some other nonvolatile storage device on board). Whoever programs the flash (or pays the CM to program the flash) provides it with a MAC address, not the vendor of the ethernet chip itself.
My employer designs products with built-in ethernet and we have our own MAC address range(s).
Here's a sketch of the AC's suggestion.
Sometimes the correct answer to a question is one the asker doesn't want to hear.
This is the correct answer. Guy should give his mom a tablet for Christmas, for "when you'd rather sit on the sofa than at the computer desk". Six months later, either he'll find it's never used (which means he's just out some money) or that she uses it exclusively (which means the problem is solved, as she's now adapted to another OS - acceptable because it's "on a tablet" instead of another PC OS).
Tablets are what parents should have been getting in 2000-2005 instead of all the PCs that were used instead, if only they had existed in non-suck forms.
It's done in all new developments, of course, but the cost of running the initial conduits in built-out neighborhoods is tremendous, with little to no return on the investment.
Heck, my street doesn't have curbs and we were annexed into Austin in 1941. (Not that I mind this, by the way.)
Oh, of course, some people will come up with something that will sell worldwide, be crazy successful, and can retire off of one thing. But those are outliers, even in today's market more the exception than the norm, and they aren't really the top of this conversation.
I don't know what it's like to work for an ad agency, and have to come up with new campaigns or slogans all the time. Nor do I know what it's like to be a comedy writer and work in a script-writing room year after year. And yet there are people who do those things, and do them well, for years and years. Maybe they burn out eventually? Maybe, and when they do they find another job, they don't expect the government to hand them profit for the rest of their lives, no matter how popular that car insurance jingle used to be.
Too early to detect sarcasm... Paypal wasn't an Ebay innovation, that's like thanking AOL for for Winamp.
Really, in what market is Ebay still a rival of Amazon ?
Well, because of this article, I'm going to look into the fees charged for selling on Amazon. I have piles of random things (board games, sterling silverware, and camera equipment right now) that I pick up somewhere and resell, but if I could do it will fewer fees on Amazon, I'll look at it.
If five people are only able to produce one "hit" in a given year, and the hit fades so fast that it doesn't earn residual income in future years, then maybe they're in the wrong profession? Maybe fire the three that don't write music or lyrics and bring in three more creative types who can both write and play? That would result in more overall hits and more money for all of them. Or maybe the one creative guy should hire studio musicians for the other four spots, only have to pay them $1000 each once to make the recording, and then pocket the other $36,000 for himself.
My understanding is that yes, they get paid for it, which is why (on Pandora at least) you can't skip more than X songs per hour. (Or at least you couldn't in 2008, back when I was training my station. I rarely skip anything now since it plays exactly what I want to hear at work barring the occasional new song that doesn't quite fit.)
Well, one reasonably popular song per album (instead of ten) is the fault of the artist, not the fans. A professional musician needs to be able to work 40 hour weeks for 40 years, just like other professionals, and save for retirement, all while producing work that people want to buy. If they can't do that in their chosen profession, they need to find another profession, and give up music or treat it as a hobby.
(Yes, this is true for plenty of creativity-based professions too.)
$3800 for what amounts to a few weeks writing a song and coming up with accompanying music, recording it, and getting it post edited doesn't sound so bad, especially since they also made money from other streaming sites, CD sales, live performances of that song, T-shirts and posters sold because people like that song, etc.
What do they expect, to be able to retire off one "hit"? If they want to be a professional musician, they need to put in 40 hour weeks for 40 years and save for retirement, just like every other professional. If they're not able to be creative like that, maybe a creative profession isn't suited for them.
Or maybe, given that iDevices entered the market before Android, those that bought into the Apple ecosystem are further along the post-PC chain, and therefore more comfortable overall with using full-featured mobile devices compared to those who entered the market later.
I know I've been reading this article on my phone, despite being able to touch my laptop with my toes. When my phone dies (it's low) or if I want to buy something, I'm more likely to grab my tablet sitting in arm's reach than grab the laptop.
See this post a little ways down for an immediate example of the knee-jerk reaction to which I refer:
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4505723&cid=45570819