what about ISPs who possibly dump the email that you DO want and have even explicitly requested into oblivion?
I don't know about you, but no mailing list that I have ever been on makes any effort to hide either its origin or nature. Besides, the hosts that send spam and mailing lists are nearly disjoint.
Wait a minute. Someone designed the process by which commecrial software is built. Why hasn't someone patented it yet?
what is this process of which you speak? I just throw bits at a compiler and an application falls out. It can't be a process - it isn't even repeatable.
,i>They aren't paid to think of things like: "Wait...I got one! What if the terrorists start calling everyone up on the phone, every time they try and get some work done! It could bring our nation's economy to a standstill."
Oh My GOD! Telemarketers are in league with Al queda!
The unions had a purpose back in the day, now they are pyramid schemes for taking money from the workers for decreased benefits and political contributions[...]
I'll remember that as I watch my industry sail off to India, China, and Vietnam.
Did you see the movie 'Patriot' with Mel Gibson. Basically him running around sabotaging and murdering British troops during our revolution.
Well, it is a declared war, and that makes all the difference. I wonder if the US media will start using the Terrorism moniker for the up and coming mess in Iraq (when the Iraqis decide to evict us).
For 150 houses, a few T1s are just fine. Figure 15:1 overcommitment and 500Kbps, and you get roughly 5Mb covering everything. Run 4 T1s together and you have all you need. If bandwidth becomes a problem (probably won't), then you can think about Frac-T3s. The reason to stay away from T3 setups is that a T3 is expensive, as is the equipment, and these people are not liekly to be running datacenters out of their farmhouses. Email and web describe the majority of their activity.
you can't upgrade the memory speed beyond what your entire CPU supports -- you have to upgrade your entire CPU. Which means AMD has to redesign the CPU to take advantage of faster (or different types of) memory. And Opterons aren't that cheap yet...
Not so. The opteron has 3 hypertransport busses which can be connected to alternate memory controllers - the onboard one is then disabled. What I want to know is whether AMD plans to maintain separate part numbers for each speed/controller combo, or if they're just going to band them, with higher clocked Opterons getting faster memory.
Another little burb was that with ram.. as the number of individual ram components increases the risk of a single bit non ecc correctable fault scales up accordingly.. such that with 8 gig + arrays the chance of uncorrectable error approches 50% per time interval
So what? Most high-end systems scrub the ram every so often, correcting ECC faults as they go. Hell, some of the Opteron chipsets do this (go AMD!).
Sure, that's what they said about Sony's DAT. Then poof, it was encumbered with DRM that kept you from making copies of your own music, recitations, bird calls, introspective silence, farts or anything as if it were owned by Micahel Jackson
I thought its main effect was the sudden proliferation of pro-sumer DAT gear, since the copying restrictions didn't apply to them.
Problem is, programmer C with ten years of experience isn't going to get stuff done in half the time of programmer B! Your salary as a function of personal productivity must taper off at some point, possibly even cutting into the company's profits.
On the contrary, the geezer can get things done much faster than the FOB hotshot. Why? Because he's done it before, and he knows how to plan, whereas the hotshot dives in and has to throw out half his code midway through. The problem is that most companies don't like to pay for geezer 90k when they can get 2 hotshots for 100k.
Perhaps the fact that '99s tornado was an F5 and this one was a F2 to low F3 has a little to do with the difference in damage/causualties?
I though that the F ratings were a measure of the damage caused. If so, then what you said is a tautology.
Re:Why are we always nitpicking?
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 1
As for the pen, well, the russians used a pencil
And the Americans got it for free from a private company. Nice, huh?
Re:The price of exploration
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Or perhaps on a sane Federal budget that didn't rely on deficit funding to cover every pork barrel?
Because NASA's budget is so large compared to the federal deficit, right? The current budget problems have nothing to do with fighting a war, cutting taxes for the rich, or the current recession, is that what you're saying?
The GNU team folks are promising a fix faster than MS, provided they can make the entire code GPL!
Hey, that's fine. Only problem is that, since they never distribute the product (it's a service), they're under no obligation to pass around the source.
Well, I take that back: there's a fourth option - eliminate all taxes on the first $25,000 of income. That would keep about 40% of the population from paying any taxes at all, without even causing a blip in the tax revenue collected by the IRS. I'd support this in a heartbeat, and I'm nowhere near being able to benefit from this kind of simplified tax scheme.
But you know what? You'll never see this happen. Do you know why? Folks like you would fight it tooth and nail - because while it provides a tremendous benefit to the lower income earners, it also provides a benefit to the upper income earners.
Actually, I favor that sort of tax policy. I don't hate the rich, but I see no reason to give them more money.
You're assuming that all people in a certain economic class will behave in exactly the same way; in addition, you're assuming that their behavior happen to be exactly the type of behavior that benefits your argument.
No, it's enough that most people behave like that, and they do. If you give someone making 20k/yr an extra $50 - $100/mo, he'd probably spend it on something, since he's probably got a list of things that he'd like to have, but can't afford. Rich people don't usually behave that way - they've got a pile of cash and all the baubles they can use (that's the whole point). They're more likely to save the extra money or invest it.
In any case, even if we follow your logic, you're wrong. Assume that every "rich" person takes their tax refund and dumps it into foreign investments. Assume that every "poor" person takes their tax refund and uses it to pay of debts and buy new goods.
.
The top 20% get about 63% of the tax cut, and propmtly bank it, or send it to elsalvador or India. The rest of us get what's left - up to $74B in 2010 - and spend it. According to the CIA world factbook, Our GDP is $10T, so $74B isn't much. If you check that second link, you'll find that economists favor cutting taxes paid by those with lower income instead of giving it to the rich, who tend to save a lot.
It may not be as large a stimulus as possible, but it will be there.
That's kind of the point. The tax cut would be more effective if it targetted those who would use it today instead of 20 years from now.
Besides, why are offshore investments bad? Aren't we living in a global economy now?
It's great if you're rich, but it sucks otherwise. Anyway, the point of the tax cut is supposedly economic stimulus in this country. I'm sure India and China would like to see more cash, but that's not what we're doing here.
Not in this case, bozo (Score:2)
by Akardam (186995) on Tuesday May 06, @09:58AM (#5890472)
If you had read the article, you would see that the issue at hand is patenting the actual genetic code of the virus. They're not talking about patenting a drug to cure it.
This is easy enough to fix. Find the guy who patented Anthrax and submit a whole bunch of prior art.
You mean like copyrighting and licensing software in order to make it Free Software?:)
Well, if we didn't do that, then someone could use our software in a commercial product, basically selling our own code back to us. This is what started the movement in the first place.
Maybe because the "rich" - the top 20% of the individual earners in the country - pay over 65% [taxpolicycenter.org] of the income taxes collected each year?
The top 10% pay half of the taxes - so what? They own 80% of the property.
If everyone has their taxes reduced by 10%, well, that means that someone who pays more taxes than you do will get more money back. If you compare the percentages, it's a fair deal.
You're ignoring the social consequences: the tax cut is pitched as an economic stimulus, but it doesn't put money in the hands of those who will spend it. A rich person is less likely to buy another car because he's got slightly more money - he'll bank it or invest in some offshore opportunity. A poor person, on the other hand, will pay off some debt and buy the new sofa he's been looking at for 6 months.
If you compare the scalar quantities that result from those percentages and start talking about "the rich" and "the poor", you've stopped talking about the math, and started trying to manipulate people's emotions.
That's how this tax cut got sold - by convincing people making 60k/yr that they are part of the rich, and that they will benefit handsomely from it. Don't go condemning critics for the tactics of the proponents.
Slashdot Mirror
what about ISPs who possibly dump the email that you DO want and have even explicitly requested into oblivion?
I don't know about you, but no mailing list that I have ever been on makes any effort to hide either its origin or nature. Besides, the hosts that send spam and mailing lists are nearly disjoint.
Wait a minute. Someone designed the process by which commecrial software is built. Why hasn't someone patented it yet?
what is this process of which you speak? I just throw bits at a compiler and an application falls out. It can't be a process - it isn't even repeatable.
What concerns me is the price fixing going in with gasoline.
So yell at the oil companies. Gas stations typically make about 10c/gal.
,i>They aren't paid to think of things like: "Wait...I got one! What if the terrorists start calling everyone up on the phone, every time they try and get some work done! It could bring our nation's economy to a standstill."
Oh My GOD! Telemarketers are in league with Al queda!
The unions had a purpose back in the day, now they are pyramid schemes for taking money from the workers for decreased benefits and political contributions[...]
I'll remember that as I watch my industry sail off to India, China, and Vietnam.
Did you see the movie 'Patriot' with Mel Gibson. Basically him running around sabotaging and murdering British troops during our revolution.
Well, it is a declared war, and that makes all the difference. I wonder if the US media will start using the Terrorism moniker for the up and coming mess in Iraq (when the Iraqis decide to evict us).
The Win95 shell imitates NeXTStep in its appearance far more than it does MacOS
Funny you should say that, since the OS X dev tools are basically updated versions of NextStep.
T1 is not the solution here.
For 150 houses, a few T1s are just fine. Figure 15:1 overcommitment and 500Kbps, and you get roughly 5Mb covering everything. Run 4 T1s together and you have all you need. If bandwidth becomes a problem (probably won't), then you can think about Frac-T3s. The reason to stay away from T3 setups is that a T3 is expensive, as is the equipment, and these people are not liekly to be running datacenters out of their farmhouses. Email and web describe the majority of their activity.
If it's still worth it to stock Diablo II on shelves in Office Depot, then it's probably still selling.
I know! It's all those item-dupers and griefers buying another reg key after they get banned again
you can't upgrade the memory speed beyond what your entire CPU supports -- you have to upgrade your entire CPU. Which means AMD has to redesign the CPU to take advantage of faster (or different types of) memory. And Opterons aren't that cheap yet...
Not so. The opteron has 3 hypertransport busses which can be connected to alternate memory controllers - the onboard one is then disabled. What I want to know is whether AMD plans to maintain separate part numbers for each speed/controller combo, or if they're just going to band them, with higher clocked Opterons getting faster memory.
What is the primary appliance for this device?
Commercial-enabled toilet paper?
Another little burb was that with ram .. as the number of individual ram components increases the risk of a single bit non ecc correctable fault scales up accordingly .. such that with 8 gig + arrays the chance of uncorrectable error approches 50% per time interval
So what? Most high-end systems scrub the ram every so often, correcting ECC faults as they go. Hell, some of the Opteron chipsets do this (go AMD!).
Sure, that's what they said about Sony's DAT. Then poof, it was encumbered with DRM that kept you from making copies of your own music, recitations, bird calls, introspective silence, farts or anything as if it were owned by Micahel Jackson
I thought its main effect was the sudden proliferation of pro-sumer DAT gear, since the copying restrictions didn't apply to them.
Problem is, programmer C with ten years of experience isn't going to get stuff done in half the time of programmer B! Your salary as a function of personal productivity must taper off at some point, possibly even cutting into the company's profits.
On the contrary, the geezer can get things done much faster than the FOB hotshot. Why? Because he's done it before, and he knows how to plan, whereas the hotshot dives in and has to throw out half his code midway through. The problem is that most companies don't like to pay for geezer 90k when they can get 2 hotshots for 100k.
Perhaps the fact that '99s tornado was an F5 and this one was a F2 to low F3 has a little to do with the difference in damage/causualties?
I though that the F ratings were a measure of the damage caused. If so, then what you said is a tautology.
As for the pen, well, the russians used a pencil
And the Americans got it for free from a private company. Nice, huh?
Or perhaps on a sane Federal budget that didn't rely on deficit funding to cover every pork barrel?
Because NASA's budget is so large compared to the federal deficit, right? The current budget problems have nothing to do with fighting a war, cutting taxes for the rich, or the current recession, is that what you're saying?
The GNU team folks are promising a fix faster than MS, provided they can make the entire code GPL!
Hey, that's fine. Only problem is that, since they never distribute the product (it's a service), they're under no obligation to pass around the source.
Well, I take that back: there's a fourth option - eliminate all taxes on the first $25,000 of income. That would keep about 40% of the population from paying any taxes at all, without even causing a blip in the tax revenue collected by the IRS. I'd support this in a heartbeat, and I'm nowhere near being able to benefit from this kind of simplified tax scheme. But you know what? You'll never see this happen. Do you know why? Folks like you would fight it tooth and nail - because while it provides a tremendous benefit to the lower income earners, it also provides a benefit to the upper income earners.
Actually, I favor that sort of tax policy. I don't hate the rich, but I see no reason to give them more money.
How rich do you think you would have to be to be benefited by such at thing?
I think I stand to gain $500/yr. If I made $1M/yr, I'd gain $11.7K this year, going up to $87K in 2010. Numbers here.
You're assuming that all people in a certain economic class will behave in exactly the same way; in addition, you're assuming that their behavior happen to be exactly the type of behavior that benefits your argument.
No, it's enough that most people behave like that, and they do. If you give someone making 20k/yr an extra $50 - $100/mo, he'd probably spend it on something, since he's probably got a list of things that he'd like to have, but can't afford. Rich people don't usually behave that way - they've got a pile of cash and all the baubles they can use (that's the whole point). They're more likely to save the extra money or invest it.
In any case, even if we follow your logic, you're wrong. Assume that every "rich" person takes their tax refund and dumps it into foreign investments. Assume that every "poor" person takes their tax refund and uses it to pay of debts and buy new goods.
Ok, let's use these numbers, or these numbers
. The top 20% get about 63% of the tax cut, and propmtly bank it, or send it to elsalvador or India. The rest of us get what's left - up to $74B in 2010 - and spend it. According to the CIA world factbook, Our GDP is $10T, so $74B isn't much. If you check that second link, you'll find that economists favor cutting taxes paid by those with lower income instead of giving it to the rich, who tend to save a lot.It may not be as large a stimulus as possible, but it will be there.
That's kind of the point. The tax cut would be more effective if it targetted those who would use it today instead of 20 years from now.
Besides, why are offshore investments bad? Aren't we living in a global economy now?
It's great if you're rich, but it sucks otherwise. Anyway, the point of the tax cut is supposedly economic stimulus in this country. I'm sure India and China would like to see more cash, but that's not what we're doing here.
Not in this case, bozo (Score:2) by Akardam (186995) on Tuesday May 06, @09:58AM (#5890472) If you had read the article, you would see that the issue at hand is patenting the actual genetic code of the virus. They're not talking about patenting a drug to cure it.
This is easy enough to fix. Find the guy who patented Anthrax and submit a whole bunch of prior art.
You mean like copyrighting and licensing software in order to make it Free Software? :)
Well, if we didn't do that, then someone could use our software in a commercial product, basically selling our own code back to us. This is what started the movement in the first place.
Maybe because the "rich" - the top 20% of the individual earners in the country - pay over 65% [taxpolicycenter.org] of the income taxes collected each year?
The top 10% pay half of the taxes - so what? They own 80% of the property.
If everyone has their taxes reduced by 10%, well, that means that someone who pays more taxes than you do will get more money back. If you compare the percentages, it's a fair deal.
You're ignoring the social consequences: the tax cut is pitched as an economic stimulus, but it doesn't put money in the hands of those who will spend it. A rich person is less likely to buy another car because he's got slightly more money - he'll bank it or invest in some offshore opportunity. A poor person, on the other hand, will pay off some debt and buy the new sofa he's been looking at for 6 months.
If you compare the scalar quantities that result from those percentages and start talking about "the rich" and "the poor", you've stopped talking about the math, and started trying to manipulate people's emotions.
That's how this tax cut got sold - by convincing people making 60k/yr that they are part of the rich, and that they will benefit handsomely from it. Don't go condemning critics for the tactics of the proponents.
bush is not pandering the 500,000 a year folks. that is a flat out lie.
Then explain how the bulk of the tax cut goes to the very rich. Normal people like you and me get about $1000.