just be aware that the cost of the licensing fees is being passed on to the consumer.
This is a common belief, but it's only true if the market in question is a fully competitive market or a monopoly, which cell phones aren't (they're an oligopoly).
If it's a fully competitive market, then the cost of the cell phone is as low as the manufacturer can possibly make it, so any increase in costs have to get passed on 100% to the consumer or the company will go under. In an oligopoly, though, each manufacturer has enough pricing power that the actual price is usually significantly higher than that (because manufacturers know there's more to be made by everyone keeping the price artificially high than by winning sales by competing on price).
If it's a monopoly, then the cost of a cell phone is whatever the manufacturer feels like, so any increase in costs will get passed on 100% to the consumer because there's nothing to stop the monopolist. In an oligopoly, though, what can stop them is their competitors who may use this as an opportunity to grab market share by providing the same product for less.
The upshot of all this: The price might go up to account for some or all of the cost, the profits (and thus investment returns) may go down to account for some or all of the cost, or the company might cut costs in other ways to pay for it. But an automatic "All cost increases get passed to the buyers." is very much an oversimplification.
If you have a hoard of 1000 bitcoins, will they declare "that is not real money" and let you keep it, or will they hypocritically take it and convert it to USD?
I believe they would sell (or more exactly, force you to sell) your Bitcoins for US dollars and use it to pay the owed tax. In other words, it gets the same treatment as any other asset you might have, such as foreign currency, stocks and bonds, real estate, furniture, etc.
A few bits of actual value: 1. If you're a US citizen, you can use US dollars to pay your legally required taxes to the US government (and probably the government of your town, county, and state). If you don't have US dollars, you can't, and the IRS can and will seize your other assets, sell them for US dollars, and use that to pay your taxes. And if you try to stop the IRS from doing this, the police and courts will if necessary use force to make that happen.
2. On your US dollar bill, you'll see "This Note Is Legal Tender For All Debts, Public and Private". If you go to a restaurant, order a meal, and offer the appropriate amount of cash to pay for your meal, the restaurant owner cannot legally refuse to accept your cash and then have you arrested for not paying your debt to them. Again, this is enforced by the police and court system.
3. Because of points (1) and (2), most everyone in the US has US dollars to pay for things, so a business that doesn't accept US dollars is going to be at a severe competitive disadvantage.
None of this stops you from exchanging your RAM sticks for someone else's kumquats if you and the kumquat-seller both agree to it.
I don't bluff while driving either, even though as a human I could. Here's why: the payoff is maybe 1-2 minutes of your time, while the risk is your life.
I just don't care about driving enough to get emotionally involved. I get in the car, I drive, I eventually get to where I'm going, I do my best not to hurt anyone in between and get there reasonably quickly. A car that does that for me would be fine.
That's the whole point of the program: The high schoolers aren't only involved, they take the lead in organizing the team and working with teachers and volunteering engineers to build and manage their bot.
Short sometimes == Better: - Programmers don't have to spend as much time reading to figure it out. - In studies, the ratio of bugs to code size is basically constant until the code is thoroughly tested. Minimize the size of the code, reduce your bug count. - For network services, including HTTP, fewer bytes = fewer packets = faster response. - Short is often simpler.
Compare the XBL shown above to the equivalent JQuery:
What specific kind of people did the Sept 11th attacks target?
World Trade Center - Executives of US-based international financial corporations, particularly Morgan Stanley. Pentagon - Top officers of the US military.
The attacks killed lots of other people too, but those were the targets.
I didn't say "directly responsible for causing", I said "directly responsible for preventing". The FBI anti-terrorism unit is there specifically to prevent bombings. They have agents that can and have directly infiltrated and stopped bomb plots (e.g. this one). That's their job description, and that this happens means they screwed up.
Speculation based purely on the public information known right now: - April 15 is Tax Day, which may be a motivating factor for the date. - The American Revolution started in Boston, which may be a motivating factor for the location. - The targeted event and means of attack guarantees a pretty random assortment of victims. It's not after political leaders, police, military, business, or any other particular organization. By contrast, Sept 11, OK City, Ft Hood, etc were all targeting very specific kinds of people and groups. - No one has claimed responsibility, so it's probably an individual rather than an organization. - Based on the above: It's probably a lone nut with anarchistic tendencies, thinking that he's starting some kind of revolution but is in fact just a lone nutcase.
My OT predictions: 1. Fox News is probably already in the process of finding a way to blame Barack Obama. 2. MSNBC is probably already in the process of finding a way to blame Republicans. 3. No one in power will blame the organization that actually was directly responsible for preventing this and similar attacks, the FBI's anti-terrorism unit.
Fred Brooks noted this one years ago, and it's still true: The reason programming is complicated is frequently because the real-world problem you're trying to model in software is complicated. The reason debugging is even more complicated is that not only do you need to understand what you're trying to model, you also need to understand exactly how the existing software modeled the real-world problem.
Imagine this scenario if you will: These guys go to Geneva and explain to the International Criminal Court exactly what George W Bush had troops do to him. Germany is now obligated by treaty to arrest and extradite the troops (who are deemed war criminals) and send them for trial, which they can do because they happen to be on leave from the US base in Germany and are thus on German territory. The troops then (to save their own necks) explain to the courts the orders they received and the duress they were put under by their superiors, and then the same thing happens to their officers, and so on up the chain of command, until George W Bush can't travel internationally for fear of ending up behind bars.
Meanwhile, there's political pressure on the president to protect the troops from those Evil European Socialists, so the Obama administration breaks the alliance with Germany and the Netherlands, and threatens to attack the Hague to get his troops back. And now most of the EU is breaking alliances with the US, NATO completely falls apart, and you may even end up with WWIII, where the United States takes on the entire rest of the world (and actually has a decent chance of winning).
Gold has other uses than as money - jewelry, for instance. Or a superb conductor.
Those who believe in gold as a store of wealth don't think of it for its intrinsic uses. Instead, the thought process is "When the US dollar collapses and civilization is crumbling around me, I'll be rich because I can buy what I need with gold while everyone around me is trying to pay $50 trillion for a loaf of bread a la 1920's Germany." The real story, of course, is that if I have a loaf of bread and civilization is collapsing around me, I'm not going to sell that loaf of bread for anything that I can't eat, drink, burn, wear, or use to defend my pile of useful stuff.
Even the "I'm holding it as a hedge against inflation" story doesn't add up: The price of gold can and does go up against the dollar. It can also go down. It can do better than the S&P 500. It can also do worse. Pick your risks, but don't ever assume that gold is a risk-free investment. It's value is and has always been as socially constructed as the value of a $1 bill.
Yes it is. He had an office that was handling the release of Guantanamo prisoners. He made the unilateral decision to shut that office down, knowing that there were 86 people determined to be completely innocent by the kangeroo court system they'd concocted for those prisoners. So yes, I'm going to blame Obama for doing that, because he in effect announced that innocence or guilt doesn't matter, and the people there were going to be locked up forever.
Congress said they couldn't bring the prisoners to the mainland US for trial. They did not prevent him from releasing the prisoners.
The idea that it's entirely the Republican's fault is wrong. The idea that it's entirely the Democrat's fault is wrong too. What's happening in Guantanamo is happening with the support of the leadership of both major parties. Which is why I voted for neither of them in the last election.
Well, the Obama administration has made the actual policy on Guantanamo prisoners very clear indeed several months ago: None of them will ever be released under any circumstances. Even those who are known to be innocent of any crime or terrorism. Even those who present (or at least presented before they went in) no threat whatsoever to the United States.
The reason we know this is that they shut down the office that was in charge of arranging releases of Guantanamo prisoners. Everything else is window dressing.
What if I don't want anyone to know that I'm opposed to the actions of my government? I live in a country where it's unlikely (but not impossible) I'll get in trouble for that opinion, but most people in the world don't have that luxury.
Slashdot Mirror
just be aware that the cost of the licensing fees is being passed on to the consumer.
This is a common belief, but it's only true if the market in question is a fully competitive market or a monopoly, which cell phones aren't (they're an oligopoly).
If it's a fully competitive market, then the cost of the cell phone is as low as the manufacturer can possibly make it, so any increase in costs have to get passed on 100% to the consumer or the company will go under. In an oligopoly, though, each manufacturer has enough pricing power that the actual price is usually significantly higher than that (because manufacturers know there's more to be made by everyone keeping the price artificially high than by winning sales by competing on price).
If it's a monopoly, then the cost of a cell phone is whatever the manufacturer feels like, so any increase in costs will get passed on 100% to the consumer because there's nothing to stop the monopolist. In an oligopoly, though, what can stop them is their competitors who may use this as an opportunity to grab market share by providing the same product for less.
The upshot of all this: The price might go up to account for some or all of the cost, the profits (and thus investment returns) may go down to account for some or all of the cost, or the company might cut costs in other ways to pay for it. But an automatic "All cost increases get passed to the buyers." is very much an oversimplification.
It's a product in the same way that manure is a product - you can buy it, but it's gonna stink and make you sick to your stomach.
If you have a hoard of 1000 bitcoins, will they declare "that is not real money" and let you keep it, or will they hypocritically take it and convert it to USD?
I believe they would sell (or more exactly, force you to sell) your Bitcoins for US dollars and use it to pay the owed tax. In other words, it gets the same treatment as any other asset you might have, such as foreign currency, stocks and bonds, real estate, furniture, etc.
Is gold, the supposed basis for our money, money?
Gold hasn't been the basis of our money for decades.
A few bits of actual value:
1. If you're a US citizen, you can use US dollars to pay your legally required taxes to the US government (and probably the government of your town, county, and state). If you don't have US dollars, you can't, and the IRS can and will seize your other assets, sell them for US dollars, and use that to pay your taxes. And if you try to stop the IRS from doing this, the police and courts will if necessary use force to make that happen.
2. On your US dollar bill, you'll see "This Note Is Legal Tender For All Debts, Public and Private". If you go to a restaurant, order a meal, and offer the appropriate amount of cash to pay for your meal, the restaurant owner cannot legally refuse to accept your cash and then have you arrested for not paying your debt to them. Again, this is enforced by the police and court system.
3. Because of points (1) and (2), most everyone in the US has US dollars to pay for things, so a business that doesn't accept US dollars is going to be at a severe competitive disadvantage.
None of this stops you from exchanging your RAM sticks for someone else's kumquats if you and the kumquat-seller both agree to it.
We're 41-year-old basement dwellers, you insensitive clod!
I don't bluff while driving either, even though as a human I could. Here's why: the payoff is maybe 1-2 minutes of your time, while the risk is your life.
I just don't care about driving enough to get emotionally involved. I get in the car, I drive, I eventually get to where I'm going, I do my best not to hurt anyone in between and get there reasonably quickly. A car that does that for me would be fine.
That's the whole point of the program: The high schoolers aren't only involved, they take the lead in organizing the team and working with teachers and volunteering engineers to build and manage their bot.
"Short != Better" (TM)
Short sometimes == Better:
- Programmers don't have to spend as much time reading to figure it out.
- In studies, the ratio of bugs to code size is basically constant until the code is thoroughly tested. Minimize the size of the code, reduce your bug count.
- For network services, including HTTP, fewer bytes = fewer packets = faster response.
- Short is often simpler.
Compare the XBL shown above to the equivalent JQuery:
$.("li#nav").on( "mouseover", doSomething );
Which one would you rather read and parse?
In other words, Netcraft confirms it: Windows is dying.
What specific kind of people did the Sept 11th attacks target?
World Trade Center - Executives of US-based international financial corporations, particularly Morgan Stanley.
Pentagon - Top officers of the US military.
The attacks killed lots of other people too, but those were the targets.
I didn't say "directly responsible for causing", I said "directly responsible for preventing". The FBI anti-terrorism unit is there specifically to prevent bombings. They have agents that can and have directly infiltrated and stopped bomb plots (e.g. this one). That's their job description, and that this happens means they screwed up.
Speculation based purely on the public information known right now:
- April 15 is Tax Day, which may be a motivating factor for the date.
- The American Revolution started in Boston, which may be a motivating factor for the location.
- The targeted event and means of attack guarantees a pretty random assortment of victims. It's not after political leaders, police, military, business, or any other particular organization. By contrast, Sept 11, OK City, Ft Hood, etc were all targeting very specific kinds of people and groups.
- No one has claimed responsibility, so it's probably an individual rather than an organization.
- Based on the above: It's probably a lone nut with anarchistic tendencies, thinking that he's starting some kind of revolution but is in fact just a lone nutcase.
OT prediction:
My OT predictions:
1. Fox News is probably already in the process of finding a way to blame Barack Obama.
2. MSNBC is probably already in the process of finding a way to blame Republicans.
3. No one in power will blame the organization that actually was directly responsible for preventing this and similar attacks, the FBI's anti-terrorism unit.
How about Aqua Teen Hunger Force?
Third, various politicians et al attend the race -- so there's the assassination angle.
The other assassination angle: They only barely missed Joey of New Kids on the Block.
They would, but they're having a difficult time getting a required photo ID.
Fred Brooks noted this one years ago, and it's still true: The reason programming is complicated is frequently because the real-world problem you're trying to model in software is complicated. The reason debugging is even more complicated is that not only do you need to understand what you're trying to model, you also need to understand exactly how the existing software modeled the real-world problem.
It's way more than mere embarassment.
Imagine this scenario if you will: These guys go to Geneva and explain to the International Criminal Court exactly what George W Bush had troops do to him. Germany is now obligated by treaty to arrest and extradite the troops (who are deemed war criminals) and send them for trial, which they can do because they happen to be on leave from the US base in Germany and are thus on German territory. The troops then (to save their own necks) explain to the courts the orders they received and the duress they were put under by their superiors, and then the same thing happens to their officers, and so on up the chain of command, until George W Bush can't travel internationally for fear of ending up behind bars.
Meanwhile, there's political pressure on the president to protect the troops from those Evil European Socialists, so the Obama administration breaks the alliance with Germany and the Netherlands, and threatens to attack the Hague to get his troops back. And now most of the EU is breaking alliances with the US, NATO completely falls apart, and you may even end up with WWIII, where the United States takes on the entire rest of the world (and actually has a decent chance of winning).
Gold has other uses than as money - jewelry, for instance. Or a superb conductor.
Those who believe in gold as a store of wealth don't think of it for its intrinsic uses. Instead, the thought process is "When the US dollar collapses and civilization is crumbling around me, I'll be rich because I can buy what I need with gold while everyone around me is trying to pay $50 trillion for a loaf of bread a la 1920's Germany." The real story, of course, is that if I have a loaf of bread and civilization is collapsing around me, I'm not going to sell that loaf of bread for anything that I can't eat, drink, burn, wear, or use to defend my pile of useful stuff.
Even the "I'm holding it as a hedge against inflation" story doesn't add up: The price of gold can and does go up against the dollar. It can also go down. It can do better than the S&P 500. It can also do worse. Pick your risks, but don't ever assume that gold is a risk-free investment. It's value is and has always been as socially constructed as the value of a $1 bill.
I'm going to suggest option 6: These people would prove to be very damaging witnesses to a war crimes tribunal.
It's not entirely fair to blame Obama.
Yes it is. He had an office that was handling the release of Guantanamo prisoners. He made the unilateral decision to shut that office down, knowing that there were 86 people determined to be completely innocent by the kangeroo court system they'd concocted for those prisoners. So yes, I'm going to blame Obama for doing that, because he in effect announced that innocence or guilt doesn't matter, and the people there were going to be locked up forever.
Congress said they couldn't bring the prisoners to the mainland US for trial. They did not prevent him from releasing the prisoners.
The idea that it's entirely the Republican's fault is wrong. The idea that it's entirely the Democrat's fault is wrong too. What's happening in Guantanamo is happening with the support of the leadership of both major parties. Which is why I voted for neither of them in the last election.
Well, the Obama administration has made the actual policy on Guantanamo prisoners very clear indeed several months ago: None of them will ever be released under any circumstances. Even those who are known to be innocent of any crime or terrorism. Even those who present (or at least presented before they went in) no threat whatsoever to the United States.
The reason we know this is that they shut down the office that was in charge of arranging releases of Guantanamo prisoners. Everything else is window dressing.
What if I don't want anyone to know that I'm opposed to the actions of my government? I live in a country where it's unlikely (but not impossible) I'll get in trouble for that opinion, but most people in the world don't have that luxury.
A light year is a unit of distance, not time.
Says a man who's never made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs.
Specifically, both being able to install a browser and staying in your job longer could easily be caused by a third factor, namely not being an idiot.