I'm pretty sure you mean sodium. At least that is what my chemesty teacher used to provide and afternoons entertainment in what was otherwise knowm to be a pretty boring class.
I wonder if there was any truth to the rumour that he had a glass eye.
I worked for a company that sold laptops that had a batch of bad batteries. I saw real video from the shock and vibe department of a laptop in a test bed start to smoke, fizzle and violently, explode in a toxic, caustic firey mess. I don't know if that explosion would have been fatal, but I sure would not have wanted to be near it and I do not want to imagine what it would do on a crowded airplane especially one that I was on.
Laptop batteries contain a tremendous amount of potential stored chemical energey and some laptops have two batteries(for longer use time).
I think this is a very real cause for concern and that the parent and those who mod him up are dumbasses for underestimating the potential lethality a commited, suicidal mainiac and his supporters could make of a modified laptop battery or two.
I can think of a few mods my self could be made to one of the things if access to explosive materiel was an option like some OBL supporters out there have.
If it were my call I would certianly ban Portable batteries on Commercial airlines.
I don't understand this kind of brand loyalty when it is associated with a TV show. When DS9 came out, all of the B5 fans were screaming bloody murder. However, B5 was still a entertaining show and DS9 was still fun to watch. They had different values for writing and acting, but more of a good thing (Sci-Fi) should not be bad.
My dad was the same way when Battlestar Galactica came out. He was an old school trekie and did not like it. Of course it may just have been the bad acting and writing in BG that did it, but even Old School Trek is not Shakespeare.
If you are a big fan of ham sandwiches and get them at Subway, do you get upset if Quizno's starts selling them? Why is there this perception that more sci-fi is is a bad thing? It's not like they are ripping off your religeon is it?
Strange, I always thought the studio heads were associated with a different faith. That reminds me of the "banned" Family Guy episode, "Wish Upon a Smith."
Zeppelin in the same sentence as disco without a "=!"? Heresey.
But, on topic, Battlestar Galactica had some serious disadvantages in it's day. It was up against the #1 rated TV show of the day, 60 Minuites, Perhaps you've heard of it.
As a kid growing up in a one TV household, never got to see the show, until the reruns. Even the pilot was preempted by a Presidential Adress.
Why thank you. I had grown to love this show, with all the different plot elements, character development, and some kick ass lowish budget action. I only saw it on broadcast TV once, (who knows what insane timeslot it was in) but managed to find all of the shown episodes on bit torrent.
Note to TV execs, if I had not seen these, post cancelation, I would never have considerd buying them on DVD. Now, the DVD is a must have for me. Don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg by litigating torrent sites. As fun and convienent as DivX/Xvid torrents are, nothing seems to beat having a hard copy on DVD.
It's not the flight training per se that makes a military aviator valuble to the airlines, but the flight hours that they accumulate while on the job.
Nowhere else will you find an orginization outside the military willing to test, screen, train, employ and eventually loose to the higher paying airlines an employee.
Also, it is not the figher jocks who the airlines are the least bit interested in, but the cargo piolts of C-5, C-17, C-141, and C-130's. That's the air lines want. I used to be a AGCS guy in the AF Reserves, and the bulk of our pilots were either those who had obtained a civilian commercial licence or were ex figher jocks looking to collect enough flight hours to even be looked at by the airlines.
When my unit got called up for the first Gulf war, these guys were lining up to rack up enough hours to qualify for a commercial aviators job.
I remember in college, a friend of mine who was dissapointed that he did not get a Tactical Air Command assighnmet and instead got Military Airlift Command. Little did he know he would have a 6 year advantage on all of the fighter jocks out there in getting to the higher paying arena of commercal flying. Which contrary to his beliefs was quite an endorsement of his skills. I mean, who is higher regarded, a pilot flying a single 20m$ aircraft, or a pilot flying a 50m$ aircraft with 50m$ in equipment or passengers?
"Starting over would render close to a decade of work worthless."
The decade worth of work is already worthless. Everyone already has a copy in one version or another and the foundation on which it is built is flawed. It is insecure by design.
It's like in Vegas when some casino wants to upgrade. They don't remodel, they blow the fucker up and start over.
Mod parent up.
Direct to DVD is the furure!
I myself am catching up on all of the DS9's and it is SOOO nice when the break to commercial goes straight to the next scene. Piced up all the Cowby Bebops, Black Adder, Soprano's, and the Simpsons. Time Warner is pushing Video on demand but with all the TV on DVD I have my own version.
It's also cool to rip them to Xvid or Divx to keep on the server for the stuff you don't want to go hunting for, or has a high replay value.
I sould just mod you down down but I will reply to modify your stupind list.
1)Ink Jet Ink 700% Profit margin. 2-5$ to produce. Profit split almost equally between retailer and manufacturer.
2)Toner Ink 100%-200% Profit margin. It is just too easy to refill thise things with toner but you do get some lock-in with the form-factor.
3)Laser printers 5%-15% Profit Margin. A tough and competitive market. A good company with a good product can eek out a living here.
4)Ink Jet Printers. -50% to -100% Profit margin. Price sensitive consumer space product. Loss leader entry level imageing.
Losing the ink cart refils on the a product designed to last a long time(so people buy more carts). This may be a deathblow to HP who generate most of their profit off of imaging products. They are getting killed by IBM on the high end server space and eaten alive by Dell on the low end (desktops and intel servers).
Dell is Austin's #1 NON-Government employer. The State of Texas (which I assume would include the univeristy itself) is the largest employer in Austin.
I found it strange to see Sen. Hollings (Disney) speaking against this ruling on C-Span. Given that his one of his primary campaign donors is one of the big four broadcast companies (ABC). This caused me to wonder what interests he would have in opposing this ruling. So, who besides the public loses with the 35% to 45% change? Advertisers, with a reduced level of competition between advertising mediums prices for advertising can only go up. So who advertises? Pretty much friggin everybody who contribues to campaingns. Oh, and politicians when running for reelection. I don't thik this ruling by the FCC will survive to be implemented.
That's what makes this story so entertaining to me. A LOT of MS corporate customers are doing just that, choosing to NOT use the MS software. Small businesses are migrateing to WP and OS as fast as they can.
This adjustment to the licence hardly seems to address the major concerds that business customers have with Licencing 6.0. The primary one being, "What is Licencing 7.0 gonna cost me?"
I think you lay the blame on the wrong suspect. The driving business reason for "Licencing 6.0" is to continue to grow revenue or at the very least to create a continuous revenue stream.
With the market pretty much saturated in Microsoft's primary revenue generating bussineses (desktop OS and Office apps) they have little room for new revenue growth. Short of moving into new markets, X-Box (loss leader) and the Enterprise (Linix is the ecnomical choice in a down economy), Microsoft must use licencing stragegies to maintain income or the stock price will suffer.
Over the years MS has gotten very large, and it is really hard to continue to grow a large company, big slow growth companies have relatively low P/E's and have to do things like pay dividends (a Microsoft first) to woo investors.
Problem with MS is that they only have two notably, profitable businesses and they have only one directon to go with those.
I'm sure that if all that you are filling out is a 1040EZ, then yes it is eaiser to fill out by hand. But those of us with "real" jobs, 401k's, employee stock purchace plans, online brokereages, IRA's and other finantial complexites, this software makes tax time much less painful.
I disturbs me that a company that had such a good brand recognition with me, i.e. it's not microsoft, would stoop to such a draconian DRM strategy. I wonder how they are going to handle all the support calls generated by the anti-virus software flagging this as a virus?
These proposals and most of the comments I see here are pretty much moot. The evil specters of Globalization and Outsourcing that Institutionalized Labor are bringing up here have been in existence on the macro level since the dawn of time. International companies have been using global labor markets to produce their products for centuries. That is what trade is. Finding goods that are more valuable in another region and moving them to there, is what capitalism does. If your competitor, weather domestic or foreign can produce the same product for less, they will run you out of business.
The thing is, that all of these companies that are moving production overseas are finding out is that you get what you pay for. With the exception of labor markets that are artificially inflated by collective bargaining, overseas labor cannot produce the same product for less. The regions that these companies can move to already compete globally with their labor in the market. There is the added cost of transporting the raw materials and goods produced to and from the "cheaper labor". The locations in which the "cheaper labor" resides do not have some key infrastructure to produce the same goods at a lower price. The added cost of training these workers to learn specialized skills is prohibitive. Finally, the added costs of communicating requirements and deficiencies are often underreported. Often there is local governmet corruption costs. The simple fact is that if it were cheaper to produce a product at a given location, a local entrepreneur would already be doing so. It does not matter weather the goods produced are intellectual products or real physical goods.
As far as the H1-B's, once they relocate to the US for any length of time, they get to see some of the hidden costs of working here. The employer takes taxes, unlike some countries where the skilled labor is cheap, out of one's paycheck. No decent public transpiration, so you have to buy/lease a car. Housing is outrageously more expensive than in most countries of origin and food costs a hell of a lot more. The kicker is that Americans are some of the hardest working people and the most productive in the world, and H1-B's will be expected to compete. I work with a LOT of H1-B's doing the same job as I, and quite a few don't make it. Some are really good at what they do and they are well compensated for it. Others, however, fail to have the necessary communication skills, talent, or work ethic to be competitive and are SENT HOME or find another job. Something I firmly believe is that if an H1-B has the skills to succeed in the United States, they could make far more money, have a higher standard of living and gain more recognition in their country of origin.
I do not fear any foreign labor. Nor should any American with, the ability learn, a traditional work ethic, good communication skills and a talent to get along well with others. However, if you don't have any of these traits, you have a lot more to worry about than an H1-B. If foreign labor is of better value, and we don't take advantage of it, then foreign companies will, and they will run domestic companies into the ground on price alone. So, either way you WILL compete with the H1-B's
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure you mean sodium. At least that is what my chemesty teacher used to provide and afternoons entertainment in what was otherwise knowm to be a pretty boring class.
I wonder if there was any truth to the rumour that he had a glass eye.
I worked for a company that sold laptops that had a batch of bad batteries. I saw real video from the shock and vibe department of a laptop in a test bed start to smoke, fizzle and violently, explode in a toxic, caustic firey mess. I don't know if that explosion would have been fatal, but I sure would not have wanted to be near it and I do not want to imagine what it would do on a crowded airplane especially one that I was on. Laptop batteries contain a tremendous amount of potential stored chemical energey and some laptops have two batteries(for longer use time). I think this is a very real cause for concern and that the parent and those who mod him up are dumbasses for underestimating the potential lethality a commited, suicidal mainiac and his supporters could make of a modified laptop battery or two. I can think of a few mods my self could be made to one of the things if access to explosive materiel was an option like some OBL supporters out there have. If it were my call I would certianly ban Portable batteries on Commercial airlines.
I don't understand this kind of brand loyalty when it is associated with a TV show. When DS9 came out, all of the B5 fans were screaming bloody murder. However, B5 was still a entertaining show and DS9 was still fun to watch. They had different values for writing and acting, but more of a good thing (Sci-Fi) should not be bad. My dad was the same way when Battlestar Galactica came out. He was an old school trekie and did not like it. Of course it may just have been the bad acting and writing in BG that did it, but even Old School Trek is not Shakespeare. If you are a big fan of ham sandwiches and get them at Subway, do you get upset if Quizno's starts selling them? Why is there this perception that more sci-fi is is a bad thing? It's not like they are ripping off your religeon is it?
"most Hollywood types are Mormons"
Mormon Picture Association of America?
Strange, I always thought the studio heads were associated with a different faith. That reminds me of the "banned" Family Guy episode, "Wish Upon a Smith."
Zeppelin in the same sentence as disco without a "=!"? Heresey.
But, on topic, Battlestar Galactica had some serious disadvantages in it's day. It was up against the #1 rated TV show of the day, 60 Minuites, Perhaps you've heard of it.
As a kid growing up in a one TV household, never got to see the show, until the reruns. Even the pilot was preempted by a Presidential Adress.
Cool, like Electric Boogaloo II. Why don't you break down your cardboard box and show us your moves?
What's next, you'll be saying Polyester, Disco, and the Bee Gee's are hip?
So, give us a link to the torrent and let us judge for ouseves. ;-)
Why thank you. I had grown to love this show, with all the different plot elements, character development, and some kick ass lowish budget action. I only saw it on broadcast TV once, (who knows what insane timeslot it was in) but managed to find all of the shown episodes on bit torrent. Note to TV execs, if I had not seen these, post cancelation, I would never have considerd buying them on DVD. Now, the DVD is a must have for me. Don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg by litigating torrent sites. As fun and convienent as DivX/Xvid torrents are, nothing seems to beat having a hard copy on DVD.
http://www.pricewatch.com/menus/m3.htm
I don't know about Itaniums, but Opterons are not cheap.
I sure do want to build a dual Opteron box though, perhaps when the dual proc board drop below 400$.
It's not the flight training per se that makes a military aviator valuble to the airlines, but the flight hours that they accumulate while on the job.
Nowhere else will you find an orginization outside the military willing to test, screen, train, employ and eventually loose to the higher paying airlines an employee.
Also, it is not the figher jocks who the airlines are the least bit interested in, but the cargo piolts of C-5, C-17, C-141, and C-130's. That's the air lines want. I used to be a AGCS guy in the AF Reserves, and the bulk of our pilots were either those who had obtained a civilian commercial licence or were ex figher jocks looking to collect enough flight hours to even be looked at by the airlines.
When my unit got called up for the first Gulf war, these guys were lining up to rack up enough hours to qualify for a commercial aviators job.
I remember in college, a friend of mine who was dissapointed that he did not get a Tactical Air Command assighnmet and instead got Military Airlift Command. Little did he know he would have a 6 year advantage on all of the fighter jocks out there in getting to the higher paying arena of commercal flying. Which contrary to his beliefs was quite an endorsement of his skills. I mean, who is higher regarded, a pilot flying a single 20m$ aircraft, or a pilot flying a 50m$ aircraft with 50m$ in equipment or passengers?
"Starting over would render close to a decade of work worthless."
The decade worth of work is already worthless. Everyone already has a copy in one version or another and the foundation on which it is built is flawed. It is insecure by design.
It's like in Vegas when some casino wants to upgrade. They don't remodel, they blow the fucker up and start over.
Mod parent up. Direct to DVD is the furure! I myself am catching up on all of the DS9's and it is SOOO nice when the break to commercial goes straight to the next scene. Piced up all the Cowby Bebops, Black Adder, Soprano's, and the Simpsons. Time Warner is pushing Video on demand but with all the TV on DVD I have my own version. It's also cool to rip them to Xvid or Divx to keep on the server for the stuff you don't want to go hunting for, or has a high replay value.
I sould just mod you down down but I will reply to modify your stupind list. 1)Ink Jet Ink 700% Profit margin. 2-5$ to produce. Profit split almost equally between retailer and manufacturer. 2)Toner Ink 100%-200% Profit margin. It is just too easy to refill thise things with toner but you do get some lock-in with the form-factor. 3)Laser printers 5%-15% Profit Margin. A tough and competitive market. A good company with a good product can eek out a living here. 4)Ink Jet Printers. -50% to -100% Profit margin. Price sensitive consumer space product. Loss leader entry level imageing. Losing the ink cart refils on the a product designed to last a long time(so people buy more carts). This may be a deathblow to HP who generate most of their profit off of imaging products. They are getting killed by IBM on the high end server space and eaten alive by Dell on the low end (desktops and intel servers).
Dell is Austin's #1 NON-Government employer. The State of Texas (which I assume would include the univeristy itself) is the largest employer in Austin.
Surely you mean "feature" for "feature."
Given that 2/3 of the Earth is covered in water, that seems a bit of a waste of availible zips. Or are you anticipating sub-aquarian habitats.
I found it strange to see Sen. Hollings (Disney) speaking against this ruling on C-Span. Given that his one of his primary campaign donors is one of the big four broadcast companies (ABC). This caused me to wonder what interests he would have in opposing this ruling. So, who besides the public loses with the 35% to 45% change? Advertisers, with a reduced level of competition between advertising mediums prices for advertising can only go up. So who advertises? Pretty much friggin everybody who contribues to campaingns. Oh, and politicians when running for reelection. I don't thik this ruling by the FCC will survive to be implemented.
That's what makes this story so entertaining to me. A LOT of MS corporate customers are doing just that, choosing to NOT use the MS software. Small businesses are migrateing to WP and OS as fast as they can. This adjustment to the licence hardly seems to address the major concerds that business customers have with Licencing 6.0. The primary one being, "What is Licencing 7.0 gonna cost me?"
I think you lay the blame on the wrong suspect. The driving business reason for "Licencing 6.0" is to continue to grow revenue or at the very least to create a continuous revenue stream. With the market pretty much saturated in Microsoft's primary revenue generating bussineses (desktop OS and Office apps) they have little room for new revenue growth. Short of moving into new markets, X-Box (loss leader) and the Enterprise (Linix is the ecnomical choice in a down economy), Microsoft must use licencing stragegies to maintain income or the stock price will suffer. Over the years MS has gotten very large, and it is really hard to continue to grow a large company, big slow growth companies have relatively low P/E's and have to do things like pay dividends (a Microsoft first) to woo investors. Problem with MS is that they only have two notably, profitable businesses and they have only one directon to go with those.
You can put a dress on a pig, but it is still a pig.
How CONVIENIENT!
"It's like trying to combine the best of democracy with the best of totalitarianism." God bless the USA!
I'm sure that if all that you are filling out is a 1040EZ, then yes it is eaiser to fill out by hand. But those of us with "real" jobs, 401k's, employee stock purchace plans, online brokereages, IRA's and other finantial complexites, this software makes tax time much less painful. I disturbs me that a company that had such a good brand recognition with me, i.e. it's not microsoft, would stoop to such a draconian DRM strategy. I wonder how they are going to handle all the support calls generated by the anti-virus software flagging this as a virus?
These proposals and most of the comments I see here are pretty much moot. The evil specters of Globalization and Outsourcing that Institutionalized Labor are bringing up here have been in existence on the macro level since the dawn of time. International companies have been using global labor markets to produce their products for centuries. That is what trade is. Finding goods that are more valuable in another region and moving them to there, is what capitalism does. If your competitor, weather domestic or foreign can produce the same product for less, they will run you out of business.
The thing is, that all of these companies that are moving production overseas are finding out is that you get what you pay for. With the exception of labor markets that are artificially inflated by collective bargaining, overseas labor cannot produce the same product for less. The regions that these companies can move to already compete globally with their labor in the market. There is the added cost of transporting the raw materials and goods produced to and from the "cheaper labor". The locations in which the "cheaper labor" resides do not have some key infrastructure to produce the same goods at a lower price. The added cost of training these workers to learn specialized skills is prohibitive. Finally, the added costs of communicating requirements and deficiencies are often underreported. Often there is local governmet corruption costs. The simple fact is that if it were cheaper to produce a product at a given location, a local entrepreneur would already be doing so. It does not matter weather the goods produced are intellectual products or real physical goods.
As far as the H1-B's, once they relocate to the US for any length of time, they get to see some of the hidden costs of working here. The employer takes taxes, unlike some countries where the skilled labor is cheap, out of one's paycheck. No decent public transpiration, so you have to buy/lease a car. Housing is outrageously more expensive than in most countries of origin and food costs a hell of a lot more. The kicker is that Americans are some of the hardest working people and the most productive in the world, and H1-B's will be expected to compete. I work with a LOT of H1-B's doing the same job as I, and quite a few don't make it. Some are really good at what they do and they are well compensated for it. Others, however, fail to have the necessary communication skills, talent, or work ethic to be competitive and are SENT HOME or find another job. Something I firmly believe is that if an H1-B has the skills to succeed in the United States, they could make far more money, have a higher standard of living and gain more recognition in their country of origin.
I do not fear any foreign labor. Nor should any American with, the ability learn, a traditional work ethic, good communication skills and a talent to get along well with others. However, if you don't have any of these traits, you have a lot more to worry about than an H1-B. If foreign labor is of better value, and we don't take advantage of it, then foreign companies will, and they will run domestic companies into the ground on price alone. So, either way you WILL compete with the H1-B's