I think this is an example of the previous article "America Losing Its Edge In Innovation". AOL could have been the internet leader, it had a huge head start. They could have at least tried to be the Amazon or Google of the Internet. But I guess they were happy in fooling their customers into believing they were providing "content".
Apparently at long ranges, the laser beam is quite wide. Also, the laser beam scatters when it hits the cockpit window. So the probability of the laser hitting the cockpit is a lot higher than you think. Also, it only takes a split second of light to distract the pilot. I can easily imagine a pilot getting significantly distracted from a laser. When a plane is landing, the last thing I want is a distracted pilot. Maybe planes and helicopter should have special coatings that will reflect or absorb the green laser light. Catching the people doing this will be very difficult.
IT people do have power. Companies with good IT will do better, therefore they will have incentive to find and keep good IT people. Although it may not seem so, the skills required for IT are relatively rare. Therefore, IT people will probably be able to find another job. Which means, that shitty management will lose their best people. Unions for factory workers make sense, because factory workers require no special skill. I do not want to be part of a union, because I think it will hurt me rather than help me.
I've heard some really messed up stories from friends who had to work at Auto factories. For example, my friend could not plug in his computer into the socket so he could start working, because that was the job of the unionized electrician. The factory workers were untouchable, and could only be fired if they did something illegal. This led to them doing the bare minimum. Of course, then they wanted an 8% raise every year. Although I'm not against unions, I think some of the unions have gotten too much power, and are crippling the companies they are working for.
Typical Slashdot... Obligatory comments, and the comments to complain about the obligatory comments. Now I'm complaining about the comment complaining about the obligatory comments..
I don't understand why it's assumed that ugly/bad code must come from developing countries. I have seen plenty of bad code coming out of US/Europeans. Unless there were comments in the code in a different language, there's no way to know who wrote it. In the end, it did its job.
No, because they have very little technology that is of interest to the US. Soon, China will start developing advanced technology on their own, and they will suddenly become sensitive to IP. But don't worry, the US will also steal the technology and force the Chinese to setup factories in the US in order to sell within the US.
Yes, because their chance of survival is very low when a cargo ship is shooting at them with machine guns. Think about it, their aim will be very poor from their small boat compared to a stable cargo ship.
Or put 2 Gatling guns at each end of the ship, no need for precision, just a shit load of ammo. I don't know why their deterrence has to be non-lethal. Any pirate would think twice about attacking a ship if they risked receiving 100 bullets per second.
Should everyone be afraid at every moment that their going to be shot by a gunman? Should everyone shoot first and ask questions later? Is one really free if he is afraid to go outside without getting shot?
Just look at the murder rates in the US vs in Europe. I would say that the country with lower murder rates is more civilized. It took 2 world wars, but now Europe has learned its lesson.
I just saw a new Motorola Andriod phone that can be connected to a monitor and keyboard and used like a normal computer. It runs on an NVidia Tegra 2 chip. No Intel, no Microsoft. Mobile phones are now powerful enough to play HD movies. Do you think NVidia is going to waste their time and money to implement DRM on their chips? Market forces decide what should be built. Market forces are against DRM, therefore DRM will not be everywhere.
I don't think Intel will get into any trouble with this, because it will most likely flop. What do you think will happen when Netflix all of a sudden told their customers to go out and buy a new computer with intel DRM, or else they would no longer be able to stream movies? There is no incentive for any streaming service to implement this DRM.
Isn't this obvious, since religion does not exist without people? I remember a religious person once told me, if there was no God and he knew it, he would rape and murder, which justifies why religion is good. I am not religious and I would never rape or murder. The fact that people like this exist frightens me. In Germany, the crime rate is very low, and East Germany are particularly non-religious. So does religion stop people from committing crimes? Perhaps some, but clearly religion is not a requirement for people to have high moral standards. In fact, religion is sometimes used to get people to commit criminal acts, like the extremists in the middle east. And what about the pedophiles that the Catholic church protects?
Your car analogy does not work. High frequency traders don't help sellers match buyers. They skim a little bit off of sellers and buyers. They are distorting the market in a major way. A market functions well when everyone has the same information to make their decisions. High frequency traders are given information not available to everyone (they get the information before everyone else gets it). I do understand your vision of HFT eventually evening out through competition and being the norm, but I also see the vision of the 4 big banks gaining a permanent advantage over everyone else.
I understand your train of thought. If a stock pays no dividend, the only way to make money is if the stock prices go up. It sounds like a Ponzi scheme. Where is the upward pressure coming from? Think about it the other way. If a company pays no dividends and the stock price is very low, then another company can simply buy 51% of all the stock and take full control of the company (and take all their profits). There is an upward pressure on the stock price if the company does well because otherwise it will be too easy to buy out.
Exactly. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan earn a huge chunk of their profit from high-frequency trading. This profit must come at an expense of someone else (like regular stock holders). In my mind, this is legal theft.
That's just the TARP money. You also have to look at what the Fed is doing. Giving Loans to Goldman Sachs at 0% -> GS buys US Treasuries and pockets the interest. Tax payers lose, Goldman Sachs wins.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is an example of the previous article "America Losing Its Edge In Innovation". AOL could have been the internet leader, it had a huge head start. They could have at least tried to be the Amazon or Google of the Internet. But I guess they were happy in fooling their customers into believing they were providing "content".
Apparently at long ranges, the laser beam is quite wide. Also, the laser beam scatters when it hits the cockpit window. So the probability of the laser hitting the cockpit is a lot higher than you think. Also, it only takes a split second of light to distract the pilot. I can easily imagine a pilot getting significantly distracted from a laser. When a plane is landing, the last thing I want is a distracted pilot. Maybe planes and helicopter should have special coatings that will reflect or absorb the green laser light. Catching the people doing this will be very difficult.
I wouldn't be surprised if Rogers and Bell got involved in developing anti-satellite missiles.
IT people do have power. Companies with good IT will do better, therefore they will have incentive to find and keep good IT people. Although it may not seem so, the skills required for IT are relatively rare. Therefore, IT people will probably be able to find another job. Which means, that shitty management will lose their best people. Unions for factory workers make sense, because factory workers require no special skill. I do not want to be part of a union, because I think it will hurt me rather than help me.
I've heard some really messed up stories from friends who had to work at Auto factories. For example, my friend could not plug in his computer into the socket so he could start working, because that was the job of the unionized electrician. The factory workers were untouchable, and could only be fired if they did something illegal. This led to them doing the bare minimum. Of course, then they wanted an 8% raise every year. Although I'm not against unions, I think some of the unions have gotten too much power, and are crippling the companies they are working for.
Typical Slashdot... Obligatory comments, and the comments to complain about the obligatory comments. Now I'm complaining about the comment complaining about the obligatory comments..
I wonder who would win in a fight, a crocodile or a shark? Australia has the most dangerous animals, those poor aussies...
I don't understand why it's assumed that ugly/bad code must come from developing countries. I have seen plenty of bad code coming out of US/Europeans. Unless there were comments in the code in a different language, there's no way to know who wrote it. In the end, it did its job.
No, because they have very little technology that is of interest to the US. Soon, China will start developing advanced technology on their own, and they will suddenly become sensitive to IP. But don't worry, the US will also steal the technology and force the Chinese to setup factories in the US in order to sell within the US.
Yes, because their chance of survival is very low when a cargo ship is shooting at them with machine guns. Think about it, their aim will be very poor from their small boat compared to a stable cargo ship.
This makes too much sense... it will never be implemented.
Or put 2 Gatling guns at each end of the ship, no need for precision, just a shit load of ammo. I don't know why their deterrence has to be non-lethal. Any pirate would think twice about attacking a ship if they risked receiving 100 bullets per second.
And allowing everyone to have them will ensure that the lunatics will be able to get one.
So you're saying more murders = more civilized? Man, that's messed up.
Should everyone be afraid at every moment that their going to be shot by a gunman? Should everyone shoot first and ask questions later? Is one really free if he is afraid to go outside without getting shot?
Just look at the murder rates in the US vs in Europe. I would say that the country with lower murder rates is more civilized. It took 2 world wars, but now Europe has learned its lesson.
I just saw a new Motorola Andriod phone that can be connected to a monitor and keyboard and used like a normal computer. It runs on an NVidia Tegra 2 chip. No Intel, no Microsoft. Mobile phones are now powerful enough to play HD movies. Do you think NVidia is going to waste their time and money to implement DRM on their chips? Market forces decide what should be built. Market forces are against DRM, therefore DRM will not be everywhere.
I don't think Intel will get into any trouble with this, because it will most likely flop. What do you think will happen when Netflix all of a sudden told their customers to go out and buy a new computer with intel DRM, or else they would no longer be able to stream movies? There is no incentive for any streaming service to implement this DRM.
There's no such thing as a dumb question. But the dumb answer to this question is "Yes".
HA, I literally laughed out loud.
The problem isn't religion...it's people.
Isn't this obvious, since religion does not exist without people? I remember a religious person once told me, if there was no God and he knew it, he would rape and murder, which justifies why religion is good. I am not religious and I would never rape or murder. The fact that people like this exist frightens me. In Germany, the crime rate is very low, and East Germany are particularly non-religious. So does religion stop people from committing crimes? Perhaps some, but clearly religion is not a requirement for people to have high moral standards. In fact, religion is sometimes used to get people to commit criminal acts, like the extremists in the middle east. And what about the pedophiles that the Catholic church protects?
Your car analogy does not work. High frequency traders don't help sellers match buyers. They skim a little bit off of sellers and buyers. They are distorting the market in a major way. A market functions well when everyone has the same information to make their decisions. High frequency traders are given information not available to everyone (they get the information before everyone else gets it). I do understand your vision of HFT eventually evening out through competition and being the norm, but I also see the vision of the 4 big banks gaining a permanent advantage over everyone else.
I understand your train of thought. If a stock pays no dividend, the only way to make money is if the stock prices go up. It sounds like a Ponzi scheme. Where is the upward pressure coming from? Think about it the other way. If a company pays no dividends and the stock price is very low, then another company can simply buy 51% of all the stock and take full control of the company (and take all their profits). There is an upward pressure on the stock price if the company does well because otherwise it will be too easy to buy out.
Exactly. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan earn a huge chunk of their profit from high-frequency trading. This profit must come at an expense of someone else (like regular stock holders). In my mind, this is legal theft.
Oh, and don't forget a big chunk of money given to AIG was channeled to Goldman Sachs.
That's just the TARP money. You also have to look at what the Fed is doing. Giving Loans to Goldman Sachs at 0% -> GS buys US Treasuries and pockets the interest. Tax payers lose, Goldman Sachs wins.