I thought the point was that the kids would be able to teach themselves. Wasn`t that the point behind the intuitive Sugar interface?
And I am not sure how wise it would be to give direct Internet access to each child. I thought the laptops were able to create mesh networks, so you could just load one laptop with textbook files (on a USB drive?), and they would be available to every OLPC in the area.
Even ignoring the above, high training/Internet costs in these countries are due to the lack of infrastructure. Infrastructure represents fixed costs that can be diluted with volume, decreasing the price per unit. "Per unit" should just be the variable cost (or "marginal cost", for those economic geeks out there), since the OLPC will be implemented in large volume.
"a decent properly educated teacher and some new high quality schoolbooks"
Sorry to break it to you, but in most countries $100 per student will not provide the above, nor even come close. So if you are willing to donate significantly more than $100, then by all means please do and perhaps you will be able to make a lasting impact on one student`s life.
However, if you only have $100 to donate, this laptop probably will have the largest impact on a child`s life. I personally like to get the biggest bang for my buck, so I will be donating to this project, even if I do end up donating more than $100 (so that my money is able to help more than one child).
We are talking about lazy documentation on what probably will amount to a couple of thousand dollars by someone who probably makes well over 100k/year. Would you honestly risk a high paying job, one you have invested a great deal of time and effort in, over a couple free trips to CONFERENCES?
If this were real fraud, he would have crossed every t and dotted every i to avoid attention. No, this looks like a case of a really busy, dedicated individual who was a bit careless with some mundane, tedious paperwork. There are probably millions of government employees who never have this problem because all they do is paperwork and never risk anything based on principles of what is best for the public.
It would be much more interesting to trace the paper-trail for how this article came to existence. . .
How is that a racial attack? No, really, I want to know.
First, it has nothing to do with race, it applies to the generations a family has lived in another country.
Second, I honestly have never heard it used in Japanese as an attack or insult, in general. Nor have I ever heard anyone be offended when called a "nissei." It is like hearing you are from Texas and calling you a Texan, or "Tex." Actually, I would say it is even less provocative than that because it has no specific reference to geography, either. Pretty timid there, Tex . . . do steamed vegtables give you heart-burn?
And I might add, for someone who thinks the Japanese deserved to be nuked, you certainly are quick at pulling out the "R" word out when it appears to be at your advantage. But seriously, inquirering minds want to know. I have devoted close to half my life to the Japanese language and culture, met many types of Japanese individuals (even *cowars back* "nissei"), and never have seen this kind of reaction before. Please enlighten me to the wrongfulness of my doings. You can even call me Tex, make us ol' even lik'.
Ahh, America . . . I love the irony . . . Number one killer of foreigners and still everyone is scared to death to say anything that could be even remotely construed as not politically correct. Priorities people . ..
Yes, I said this thread was dead before when we started saying we "knew" things we could not possibly know. And yet here I type, wanting to know more about the fascinating world of Bani . . .
Why thanks, Nisei. So does this mean you are the ultimate authority on public opinion of both nations now?
I believe this mess started because I refused to let a post that stated Japan DESERVED the nukes to go unprotested. No, I do not believe Japan was a victim, but I also think most Americans are seriously closed minded when it comes to the subject and consider anything but their ridiculously oversimplified little story as "looney" (at least you did not call me a terrorist, which I appreciate, considering the times).
No, the world is a bit more complex, Nisei (or should I say "Sansei?"). I hope I haven't been completely wasting my time, and you have at least visited, say, the Hiroshima museum? Next time you are asking people about the war, you might want to balance your sample and question those coming out of that musuem.
Finally, in the end, the popular views of the war are just that "views." Views are well reasoned subjective opinion at best and blindly memorized mindless dogma at worst. However, I propose that there is an objective criteria that can be used. Since the end of WII, the U.S. has continued to engage in various conflict throughout the world, resulting in millions of deaths. Japan, on the other hand, has never invaded or engaged in combat since 1945.
You may see my views as BS, but, logically, you must know I see your views to be equally distorted. However, your views reflect the popular beliefs of a nation that, at this very moment, is slaughtering foreigners on their foreign soil. Could it be that their is some flaw in this mindset, not because the mindset is not well thought out but because it results in people being TOO comfortable with their nation's wartime actions that they do not object to the next time, and next time, and next time . ..
Does a better example of history repeating itself exist?
Fortunately, History cannot be erased, suppressed, or rewritten. However, my history books in both highschool and college in the U.S. did not include things like the following quote:
No, you misunderstood my post. The evidence exists but the American public has been taught to look back at WWII and the Asian Pacific conflicts with pride. Therefore, invasions like Iraq are simply the continuation of the "liberation crusade," what makes America Great.
However, just looking at the relative death counts of the conflicts I listed paint a clear picture of the destructive path the American empire has left in history. Yet, though the dots are there, no textbook or teacher/professor I ever had in the U.S. ever connected them.
One last note. If you are a typical American, your primary and only language is English, and you have no excuse for poor reading comprehension. Misquoting an argument is not a form of argumentation accepted by the rest of the world. You might want to remember that next time you post.
It is also nice to write history in such a way that leaves no doubt in the past actions of one's nation.
I would post some arguments to your post, by the fact is, I have heard your argument many, many times and the fact is it is based on KNOWING things, you simply do not, kinda of like KNOWING there is a God. But this type of KNOWING is beyond argument, so I suppose the thread dies here.
The depressing thing is that there are patterns in Japan, Korea, Vietnam and, yes, Iraq invasions. Yet the patterns are not seen as history repeating itself to the American public because their history has been written in such a way that the pattern is lost.
I respect your view, but for me to accept your view as my own would be for me to give up hope that that the human race is possible of coexisting peacefully.
I see . . . having an opinion different from yours means I must be dumb or, at the very least, do not deserve the kind of respect you would give "your kind." Yet, ironically, this behavior only strengthens my points that the U.S. is being driven by a culture that is both shortsighted and uncompromising. But I must digress . . .
Yes, Empires are tough to negotiate with, but the U.S. not realizing that cutting off Japan from oil was the same as an act of war was due to a gap in the cultures. Before WII, Japan had always been treated as an inferior nation by the Western powers, being limited in international treaties. Even Japanese immigrants were not allowed to own land in the U.S. So, to say the least, there were not a lot diplomatic communication between the nations, because Japan (and Asia) was considered an insignificant interest to the West.
However, this is beyond the scope. My argument is that Japan was crippled before the invasion of Okinawa. Had the U.S. not been so busy thinking of its own empire, better alternatives could have been implemented.
Btw, Kamikazes DID only have enough fuel to reach their targets. The fact that their pilots were inexperienced is self-evident (why waste a good pilot). The good pilots got full fuel tanks and were not sent on suicide missions ("all the good pilots were killed" does not seem very logical, imho).
I have spent significant time in BOTH countries, studying BOTH histories. Consequently, my views are very different from those that have only learned their history in one country or the other.
I would recommend you doing the same, but your blatant intolerance and hostility towards different views makes me think that instead of the Pacific war, your time would be much better spent studying the ill effects of the war in Europe and self-destructive nature of the Nazis regime.
Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because the U.S. decided to cut off Japan's oil supply. Japan has no oil supply and very insignificant amounts of natural gas. Without oil, the Japanese empire was doomed.
It should be stressed that the primary reason for implementing Kamikazes was the lack of fuel. One way tickets require less fuel . ..
Finally, for those that say the atomic bombs SAVED lives, you are quite right as long as you stay within the constraints of the "American Empire" condition, that MUST always be decisive and never show compromise.
However, indulge me for a moment, and imagine an island nation that has been defeated overseas and is now isolated from the resources (oil) that brought it to civilization. What if, at this point, the U.S. worked with its allies to make sure Japan was completely cut off from the outside world. The U.S. could then use the promise of trade as carrot to lead what was left of the Japanese empire to a peaceful end of the war WITHOUT invasion of the mainland. But, that would take time, perhaps require inspections, and even help from other allies, like the damn commies.
No, the U.S. was too self righteous to compromise and show moderations then . . . and some would argue things have not changed since.
In other words, they have a fixed amount of money they can use to educate children. Less money on software means more money to teachers, textbooks, and things more geared towards the goal of "education."
Microsoft products do not fit well as education tools for two reasons:
1. They are artificially expensive, unrelated to the inputs used in their production (Basic Economic theory here . . . why don't schools buy BMW School Buses too, while they are at it? Or serve caviar during lunch?)
2. Its strengths are in how it HIDES COMPLEXITY FROM THE USER. I suppose we could also convert all the textbooks to use easy words and big pictures, but some believe a lot of learning occurs when students are actually exposed to the realities behind how things work. Not that recent OSS is not really easy to use, but anyone is always free to poke around with the inner workings, if they are interested.
"Years ago I worked at an internal corporate help desk, and I saw way too many people spending way too much time doing wack-ass shit in Excel when they could have used Access and done it all with a single SELECT statement."
This is only so true . . . this is also why I believe OpenOffice has the potential to really improve productivity in this area (drag 'n drop database creation integrated into the spreadsheet).
No doubt this is advanced technology, but maybe the technology itself is not where invention is most beneficial at this point. I believe robotics is a highly under-applied technology.
For instance, the most useful robotic technology I have owned so far is a self-cleaning litter box. It consists of a simple motion detector and timer. However, though these technologies have existed for atleast 50 years, it has only relatively recently made it to market where the consumer can benefit.
I believe this project is geared towards mass-applying existing technology, not inventing AI, which appears to be what you are describing in your post.
I see it this way, as soon as we are able to create AI that even comes close to having the same intelligence as the least bright minded of humanity, humanity will need to make some profoundly serious decisions on where to go there on out because AI will have reached an exponential growth rate.
Even the people you think are truly dumb are capable of a level of thought that our technology is simply not capable of mimicking. If you were to combine this ability to be concious of one's own existence with the efficiencies of our current computer technology, it is quite likely no future invention would ever be created by man (unless the AI chose not to share its technology with man).
Consequently, until we reach that point, there will always be jobs for people that technology simply cannot replace. The jobs that are getting replaced now are those that wer forcing people to act like mindless robots!
The free market will eventually smooth things out, but it is our government's responsibility to insure that we reach this level of equilibrium, or somewhere close, within our lifetimes.
My father has diebetes, and though immuno-depressing drugs do not sound so great, having his insulin level constantly in sync with his blood-sugar level should greatly help prevent diebetic complications (which are far worse than the daily dealings with the disease).
My father's daily routine is
1) measure his blood-sugar level (pricking the finger is the most accurate way to test)
2) injecting himself with the appropriate insulin amount.
However, there is a limit to how many times a day this can be done which results in stress to his system inbetween injections.
Though he is a type I diebetic, I certainly would not mind giving this treatment a shot even if his immune system would sabotage things in the end. I happen to live in Japan so it is not like I can complain about the treatment being too far from home . ..
"It's a nice goal to have everyone connected. But you have to ask 'why?'"
This region of the world was recently devastated by a tsunami because there was no system in place to warn people. If everyone was connected, it would be much easier to warn these people.
Yes, even starving people can utilize information. What good is food and water to a corpse?
"liberating places like Iraq from corrupt regimes"
How does it feel to be winning abroad but losing at home?
"The Japanese are still embarassed by the last war they started"
And you, being the enlightened American, are not embarrassed by the firebombing of innocent civilians in Tokyo or the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Or by the fact that the U.S. has waged many wars since . . . oh, all in the "name of freedom," of course?
"they understand the need to get involved"
Btw, the Japanese are there to rebuild the bridges and roads that the U.S. destroyed and require other countries, like Australia, for protection, since the only legal (under the Japanese constitution) way they can be there is if they are not involved in combat (or in a "combat zone" for that matter!). This is just Koizumi and the Jiminto doing a nice, nice for the most powerful/dangerous man on this planet. This is the most unpopular decision Koizumi has ever made in his career.
"Less turmoil, and fewer crazy tyrants with pet oilfields in the world is crucial"
Hmm, we agree on something . . .
If Microsoft is buying Anti-Virus software companies that have versions for Linux then there is now a whole lot more incentive for Anit-Virus companies to put out Linux versions of their software.
requires public companies to match revenue with the associated expense incurred in order to generate that given revenue. Otherwise, the economic activity would not be properly represented.
Say you are going to give a Christmas bonus to your employees depending their performance over a six month period. Though you will not pay cash until December, you will actually have to charge 1/6 the expense every month in order to properly time the expense as the bonus is being earned.
For stock options, I believe you have to set a "vesting period" and charge over the vesting period, as the employee "earns" the stock option. I guess the amount you would charge would have to be the estimated fair value at that point the stock option was fully vested, or earned. After the stock option is earned it should have been fully expensed because it is no longer contributing to Revenue by motivating your employee to work. Though the company must honor the option amount after it has been earned, the change in price should have been reflected in the fair value (present value of the entire life of the option) that you charged during the "earning period."
No, the idea is to have as little taxable income as possible while showing the highest reportable income as possible. There are differences in how the two are calculated, but I see no indication that the stock option calculations will be different. I have to check, but I believe the method of calculation is pretty much standardized based on some formula that uses past price fluctuations, not much room for manipulation.
The difference is that investors (and other stakeholders) will only be concerned with the number that includes stock option expense because that is the number that will be comparable to other companies, including those that do no issue stock options.
were called "terrorists" because they went after civilian targets. Is it just me, or is the "American" English language expanding the word to apply to all enemies of the state?
Kind of scary that I almost read through the parent post without giving it a second thought . ..
Slashdot Mirror
I thought the point was that the kids would be able to teach themselves.
Wasn`t that the point behind the intuitive Sugar interface?
And I am not sure how wise it would be to give direct Internet access
to each child. I thought the laptops were able to create mesh networks,
so you could just load one laptop with textbook files (on a USB drive?), and
they would be available to every OLPC in the area.
Even ignoring the above, high training/Internet costs in these countries are due to the lack
of infrastructure. Infrastructure represents fixed costs that can be diluted
with volume, decreasing the price per unit. "Per unit" should just be the variable
cost (or "marginal cost", for those economic geeks out there), since the OLPC will be
implemented in large volume.
"a decent properly educated teacher and some new high quality schoolbooks"
Sorry to break it to you, but in most countries $100 per student will not provide the above, nor even come close. So if you are willing to donate significantly more than $100, then by all means please do and perhaps you will be able to make a lasting impact on one student`s life.
However, if you only have $100 to donate, this laptop probably will have the largest impact on a child`s life. I personally like to get the biggest bang for my buck, so I will be donating to this project, even if I do end up donating more than $100 (so that my money is able to help more than one child).
Cheers.
Though this press release is like 4 years old.
I would like a cellphone with a built in projector screen, projection keyboard, wifi, that runs on a fuel cell.
I think that would _complete_ me.
We are talking about lazy documentation on what probably will amount to a couple of thousand dollars by someone who probably makes well over 100k/year. Would you honestly risk a high paying job, one you have invested a great deal of time and effort in, over a couple free trips to CONFERENCES?
If this were real fraud, he would have crossed every t and dotted every i to avoid attention. No, this looks like a case of a really busy, dedicated individual who was a bit careless with some mundane, tedious paperwork.
There are probably millions of government employees who never have this problem because all they do is paperwork and never risk anything based on principles of what is best for the public.
It would be much more interesting to trace the paper-trail for how this article came to existence. . .
We had had a bit more foresight when we were setting our priorities.
They will if they think you are an investor. . .
http://www.physorg.com/news4220.html
How is that a racial attack? No, really, I want to know.
.
First, it has nothing to do with race, it applies to the generations a family has lived in another country.
Second, I honestly have never heard it used in Japanese as an attack or insult, in general. Nor have I ever heard anyone be offended when called a "nissei." It is like hearing you are from Texas and calling you a Texan, or "Tex." Actually, I would say it is even less provocative than that because it has no specific reference to geography, either. Pretty timid there, Tex . . . do steamed vegtables give you heart-burn?
And I might add, for someone who thinks the Japanese deserved to be nuked, you certainly are quick at pulling out the "R" word out when it appears to be at your advantage. But seriously, inquirering minds want to know. I have devoted close to half my life to the Japanese language and culture, met many types of Japanese individuals (even *cowars back* "nissei"), and never have seen this kind of reaction before. Please enlighten me to the wrongfulness of my doings. You can even call me Tex, make us ol' even lik'.
Ahh, America . . . I love the irony . . . Number one killer of foreigners and still everyone is scared to death to say anything that could be even remotely construed as not politically correct. Priorities people . .
Yes, I said this thread was dead before when we started saying we "knew" things we could not possibly know. And yet here I type, wanting to know more about the fascinating world of Bani . . .
Why thanks, Nisei. So does this mean you are the ultimate authority on public opinion of both nations now?
.
I believe this mess started because I refused to let a post that stated Japan DESERVED the nukes to go unprotested. No, I do not believe Japan was a victim, but I also think most Americans are seriously closed minded when it comes to the subject and consider anything but their ridiculously oversimplified little story as "looney" (at least you did not call me a terrorist, which I appreciate, considering the times).
No, the world is a bit more complex, Nisei (or should I say "Sansei?"). I hope I haven't been completely wasting my time, and you have at least visited, say, the Hiroshima museum? Next time you are asking people about the war, you might want to balance your sample and question those coming out of that musuem.
Finally, in the end, the popular views of the war are just that "views." Views are well reasoned subjective opinion at best and blindly memorized mindless dogma at worst. However, I propose that there is an objective criteria that can be used. Since the end of WII, the U.S. has continued to engage in various conflict throughout the world, resulting in millions of deaths. Japan, on the other hand, has never invaded or engaged in combat since 1945.
You may see my views as BS, but, logically, you must know I see your views to be equally distorted. However, your views reflect the popular beliefs of a nation that, at this very moment, is slaughtering foreigners on their foreign soil. Could it be that their is some flaw in this mindset, not because the mindset is not well thought out but because it results in people being TOO comfortable with their nation's wartime actions that they do not object to the next time, and next time, and next time . .
Does a better example of history repeating itself exist?
Fortunately, History cannot be erased, suppressed, or rewritten. However, my history books in both highschool and college in the U.S. did not include things like the following quote:
Curtis LeMay, later said: "I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal. I would think a crime would be a crime, regardless of which side won . . .
No, you misunderstood my post. The evidence exists but the American public has been taught to look back at WWII and the Asian Pacific conflicts with pride. Therefore, invasions like Iraq are simply the continuation of the "liberation crusade," what makes America Great.
However, just looking at the relative death counts of the conflicts I listed paint a clear picture of the destructive path the American empire has left in history. Yet, though the dots are there, no textbook or teacher/professor I ever had in the U.S. ever connected them.
One last note. If you are a typical American, your primary and only language is English, and you have no excuse for poor reading comprehension. Misquoting an argument is not a form of argumentation accepted by the rest of the world. You might want to remember that next time you post.
It is also nice to write history in such a way that leaves no doubt in the past actions of one's nation.
I would post some arguments to your post, by the fact is, I have heard your argument many, many times and the fact is it is based on KNOWING things, you simply do not, kinda of like KNOWING there is a God. But this type of KNOWING is beyond argument, so I suppose the thread dies here.
The depressing thing is that there are patterns in Japan, Korea, Vietnam and, yes, Iraq invasions. Yet the patterns are not seen as history repeating itself to the American public because their history has been written in such a way that the pattern is lost.
I respect your view, but for me to accept your view as my own would be for me to give up hope that that the human race is possible of coexisting peacefully.
I see . . . having an opinion different from yours means I must be dumb or, at the very least, do not deserve the kind of respect you would give "your kind." Yet, ironically, this behavior only strengthens my points that the U.S. is being driven by a culture that is both shortsighted and uncompromising. But I must digress . . .
Yes, Empires are tough to negotiate with, but the U.S. not realizing that cutting off Japan from oil was the same as an act of war was due to a gap in the cultures. Before WII, Japan had always been treated as an inferior nation by the Western powers, being limited in international treaties. Even Japanese immigrants were not allowed to own land in the U.S. So, to say the least, there were not a lot diplomatic communication between the nations, because Japan (and Asia) was considered an insignificant interest to the West.
However, this is beyond the scope. My argument is that Japan was crippled before the invasion of Okinawa. Had the U.S. not been so busy thinking of its own empire, better alternatives could have been implemented.
Btw, Kamikazes DID only have enough fuel to reach their targets. The fact that their pilots were inexperienced is self-evident (why waste a good pilot). The good pilots got full fuel tanks and were not sent on suicide missions ("all the good pilots were killed" does not seem very logical, imho).
I have spent significant time in BOTH countries, studying BOTH histories. Consequently, my views are very different from those that have only learned their history in one country or the other.
I would recommend you doing the same, but your blatant intolerance and hostility towards different views makes me think that instead of the Pacific war, your time would be much better spent studying the ill effects of the war in Europe and self-destructive nature of the Nazis regime.
At least it was for Japan.
.
Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because the U.S. decided to cut off Japan's oil supply. Japan has no oil supply and very insignificant amounts of natural gas. Without oil, the Japanese empire was doomed.
It should be stressed that the primary reason for implementing Kamikazes was the lack of fuel. One way tickets require less fuel . .
Finally, for those that say the atomic bombs SAVED lives, you are quite right as long as you stay within the constraints of the "American Empire" condition, that MUST always be decisive and never show compromise.
However, indulge me for a moment, and imagine an island nation that has been defeated overseas and is now isolated from the resources (oil) that brought it to civilization. What if, at this point, the U.S. worked with its allies to make sure Japan was completely cut off from the outside world. The U.S. could then use the promise of trade as carrot to lead what was left of the Japanese empire to a peaceful end of the war WITHOUT invasion of the mainland. But, that would take time, perhaps require inspections, and even help from other allies, like the damn commies.
No, the U.S. was too self righteous to compromise and show moderations then . . . and some would argue things have not changed since.
Can it run Lynx?
In other words, they have a fixed amount of money they can use to educate children. Less money on software means more money to teachers, textbooks, and things more geared towards the goal of "education."
Microsoft products do not fit well as education tools for two reasons:
1. They are artificially expensive, unrelated to the inputs used in their production (Basic Economic theory here . . . why don't schools buy BMW School Buses too, while they are at it? Or serve caviar during lunch?)
2. Its strengths are in how it HIDES COMPLEXITY FROM THE USER. I suppose we could also convert all the textbooks to use easy words and big pictures, but some believe a lot of learning occurs when students are actually exposed to the realities behind how things work. Not that recent OSS is not really easy to use, but anyone is always free to poke around with the inner workings, if they are interested.
"Years ago I worked at an internal corporate help desk, and I saw way too many people spending way too much time doing wack-ass shit in Excel when they could have used Access and done it all with a single SELECT statement."
This is only so true . . . this is also why I believe OpenOffice has the potential to really improve productivity in this area (drag 'n drop database creation integrated into the spreadsheet).
No doubt this is advanced technology, but maybe the technology itself is not where invention is most beneficial at this point. I believe robotics is a highly under-applied technology.
For instance, the most useful robotic technology I have owned so far is a self-cleaning litter box. It consists of a simple motion detector and timer. However, though these technologies have existed for atleast 50 years, it has only relatively recently made it to market where the consumer can benefit.
I believe this project is geared towards mass-applying existing technology, not inventing AI, which appears to be what you are describing in your post.
"Not everyone can pass Chemistry 101"
I see it this way, as soon as we are able to create AI that even comes close to having the same intelligence as the least bright minded of humanity, humanity will need to make some profoundly serious decisions on where to go there on out because AI will have reached an exponential growth rate.
Even the people you think are truly dumb are capable of a level of thought that our technology is simply not capable of mimicking. If you were to combine this ability to be concious of one's own existence with the efficiencies of our current computer technology, it is quite likely no future invention would ever be created by man (unless the AI chose not to share its technology with man).
Consequently, until we reach that point, there will always be jobs for people that technology simply cannot replace. The jobs that are getting replaced now are those that wer forcing people to act like mindless robots!
The free market will eventually smooth things out, but it is our government's responsibility to insure that we reach this level of equilibrium, or somewhere close, within our lifetimes.
My father has diebetes, and though immuno-depressing drugs do not sound so great, having his insulin level constantly in sync with his blood-sugar level should greatly help prevent diebetic complications (which are far worse than the daily dealings with the disease).
.
My father's daily routine is
1) measure his blood-sugar level (pricking the finger is the most accurate way to test)
2) injecting himself with the appropriate insulin amount.
However, there is a limit to how many times a day this can be done which results in stress to his system inbetween injections.
Though he is a type I diebetic, I certainly would not mind giving this treatment a shot even if his immune system would sabotage things in the end. I happen to live in Japan so it is not like I can complain about the treatment being too far from home . .
Where do I sign-up . . .
"It's a nice goal to have everyone connected. But you have to ask 'why?'"
This region of the world was recently devastated by a tsunami because there was no system in place to warn people. If everyone was connected, it would be much easier to warn these people.
Yes, even starving people can utilize information. What good is food and water to a corpse?
"liberating places like Iraq from corrupt regimes" How does it feel to be winning abroad but losing at home? "The Japanese are still embarassed by the last war they started" And you, being the enlightened American, are not embarrassed by the firebombing of innocent civilians in Tokyo or the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Or by the fact that the U.S. has waged many wars since . . . oh, all in the "name of freedom," of course? "they understand the need to get involved" Btw, the Japanese are there to rebuild the bridges and roads that the U.S. destroyed and require other countries, like Australia, for protection, since the only legal (under the Japanese constitution) way they can be there is if they are not involved in combat (or in a "combat zone" for that matter!). This is just Koizumi and the Jiminto doing a nice, nice for the most powerful/dangerous man on this planet. This is the most unpopular decision Koizumi has ever made in his career. "Less turmoil, and fewer crazy tyrants with pet oilfields in the world is crucial" Hmm, we agree on something . . .
If Microsoft is buying Anti-Virus software companies that have versions for Linux then there is now a whole lot more incentive for Anit-Virus companies to put out Linux versions of their software.
requires public companies to match revenue with the associated expense incurred in order to generate that given revenue. Otherwise, the economic activity would not be properly represented.
Say you are going to give a Christmas bonus to your employees depending their performance over a six month period. Though you will not pay cash until December, you will actually have to charge 1/6 the expense every month in order to properly time the expense as the bonus is being earned.
For stock options, I believe you have to set a "vesting period" and charge over the vesting period, as the employee "earns" the stock option. I guess the amount you would charge would have to be the estimated fair value at that point the stock option was fully vested, or earned. After the stock option is earned it should have been fully expensed because it is no longer contributing to Revenue by motivating your employee to work. Though the company must honor the option amount after it has been earned, the change in price should have been reflected in the fair value (present value of the entire life of the option) that you charged during the "earning period."
No, the idea is to have as little taxable income as possible while showing the highest reportable income as possible. There are differences in how the two are calculated, but I see no indication that the stock option calculations will be different. I have to check, but I believe the method of calculation is pretty much standardized based on some formula that uses past price fluctuations, not much room for manipulation.
The difference is that investors (and other stakeholders) will only be concerned with the number that includes stock option expense because that is the number that will be comparable to other companies, including those that do no issue stock options.
I am sorry, I thought worker safety was ensured by creating laws, not putting those jobs under a government agency . . .
Insightful? Or does slashdot just have a big NASA following?
were called "terrorists" because they went after civilian targets. Is it just me, or is the "American" English language expanding the word to apply to all enemies of the state?
.
Kind of scary that I almost read through the parent post without giving it a second thought . .