"If it was any older than 12 (twelve), I'd reject them..."
Wish you'd reconsider that, as I was probably 40 or so before I got into C/C++. My first programing was done on an IBM System/3 (RPG, COBOL, FORTRAN, Assembly) located in the basement of my high school (6 semesters of CS, class of '75). Owned my own computer since '78.
Have done the above, plus DEC PDP-8e assembly, DEC PDP-11 assembly, 6502 assem, 68K assem, a multitude of BASICs (including a couple of interpreters that I wrote myself), Forth (don't ask), Smalltalk, Pascal, Object-Pascal, C, C++, Java, Objective-C, CF,.NET, some PHP, and played with quite a few others here and there. (The Apple/Mac track is probably showing through.) Written languages, business software, commercial shrink-wrapped applications, client/server stuff, drivers, and, of course, web-based systems.
Just goes to show that hard and fast rules run often up against boundary conditions... (grin)
"However, with 2 earners you're only losing 40-60% of your household income in the face of a layoff, versus 100% for a 1 income. This makes a 2 earner household more resilient."
A two earner household is only more resilient if, and only if, it can stay afloat for a significant period of time on a single salary. If, as the parent implies, they need BOTH salaries to make the mortgage payment, the car payments, pay the student loans and the credit cards and the other bills, THEN they are susceptible to the Two Income Trap. Lose just one salary in that case, and the ship begins to take on water and sink.
Further, you tend to imply that gross overspending is the major cause behind bankruptcy, when in fact two of the major triggers are job loss and medical problems. Get sick, or involved in a significant accident, and one wage earner can lose their job just when they're getting hit with major medical expenses. Children are a issue too, but often because parents buy that "two income" house in order to be closer to better schools.
If at all possible, it's best to try to keep base expenses within the range of a single salary, and use the second for savings and investments, vacations, eating out, supporting hobbies, and so on. Then, and only then, is a two earner household truly "more resilient" and not susceptible to "the trap".
"If you're able to pay for it, including the externalities, then it should be your choice."
And like I said, your personal choice often has a significant impact on everyone else. Add up all the personal "choices" from driving gas hogging SUVs, and suddenly our trade deficit shoots up by billions of dollars, we end up spending trillions of dollars, years, and lives in a war started primarily to "stabilize" our supply of oil, we create massive amounts of CO2 and smog, and on, and on.
In a modern society one often has to deal with the fact that the world doesn't revolve solely around you, and you're not free to make every choice (murder, theft, speeding, polution, whatever) your little black heart desires.
"Letting the American taxpayer keep their money, in the form of reduced income taxes and reduce capital gains taxes..."
As said above, that money will in most cases simply get exported when the "American taxpayer" uses the extra cash to buy a new flatscreen TV. Which was really what was wrong with Bush's "stimulus check".
At the very least, spending money on infrastructure means that, when we're done, we have something HERE to show for our dollars.
"The report is therefore saying that investing 30 billion could result in ZERO "new" jobs, it will merely allow the retention of existing jobs."
Picking one extreme. On the other it could in fact create an additonal 212,000 jobs.
Or, even worst case, and viewed from anther angle, it could prevent 212,000 jobs from being lost; stopping 212,000 people from hitting welfare and unemployment.
"I'd rather see the old-fashioned boring infrastructure fixed/updated..."
And I'd rather scale defense spending back a bit and do both. Once constructed, new roads and bridges aren't going to help much in maintaining our gloal competitiveness, nor are they likely to generate much in the way of future jobs and income.
"Someone who makes $120k is not spending 100% of their paycheck- not even close. They're putting a fair amount into long and short term savings."
And??? You think the money just disappears at that point? Or is it used to buy stocks and bonds, and taken by banks and invested in loans and other financial instruments?
"...nor should it give you an increased volume in any competent design."
Nice qualifier. Wrong, but nice nonetheless. A removable LiPo battery needs a rather substantial case, as throwing raw lithium cells into your briefcase to rattle around as they please is... well, let's just say that it's a no-no. Further, you now need a compartment (back, sides) in which to contain said battery, as exposing raw circuit boards to users also tends to be contra-indicated.
With the container and compartment gone, you're now free to play with the shape of the cells, snugging them in and around other components, and making better use of the available nooks and crannies.
A few extra millimeters here, a few centimeters there, and volume-wise things start to add up pretty quickly. A battery 5cm x 10cm x 1cm is 50 cubic cms. Gain just an extra half centimeter in each dimension (5.5*10.5*1.5), and you've got 86.6 cubic cms... a 42% increase.
You made my point. There is no "unified gospel". No single point of view. No one size fits all.
The fact that there's 350 comments debating the issue is another case in point. You may want free software. I may not care as long as it works. The guy next door doesn't seem to mind paying. So having a "unified vision of an ideal" just isn't going to happen.
All depends on how you read the fine print. The iPhone is rated for 300-400 full power charges before dropping below 90%. Four nights of quarter power recharges roughly equals one full cycle.
So, in essence, it depends on your personal usage cycle as to how long it will last.
First, the article is discussing their new 17" 1920x1200 notebook. There's no use having a desktop replacement notebook with a screen that size if you're not "comfortable" using it.
Second, if you really have that much crap to plug into your computer (everyone always goes for the worst case), then get a friggin' DESKTOP machine and stop compromising with notebook-scale components and limitations on processors, RAM, and hard drives. Add a smaller notebook for on the go situations and you're set.
Which, BTW, is what I do. I have a 24" iMac for work, and a 15" MBP for travel. (I also did the wireless bit with an older 17" MBP, so I know it works. Set it down, pop in the mag safe, and I was off to the races.)
Finally, I tried the new "mag safe" monitor at an Apple store, and it takes maybe two seconds with the new connectors to plug in power, monitor, and USB. Even quicker to disconnect. Which, BTW, is a major advantage over my old Dell which DID have a slid in dock, and from which unlocking and disconnecting was a major procedure.
Docks are not all they're made out to be either...
Because with Apple the AirPort Express is your "dock", as most of what you're asking for can already be done wirelessly. Plug your speakers and your printer into your Express, and you're good to go the second you set your notebook down.
Use a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. No wires. Do Time Machine backups to Time Capsule. No wires. Actual, physical wires are so... '80s.
At least in that case you KNOW a major portion of its income comes from Google, and the community can perform additional oversite on those sorts of articles.
As is, Wiki is supported by private donations. Who know if, per your earlier example, Pepsi is already passing in money (and gaining influence) under the table? Maybe the Coke article is already biased... and you don't even know it. One can make the same case against ANY funding source (such as government grants), but the fact of the matter is that the servers need power and bandwidth, and the money needed to do so has to come from SOMEWHERE. TANSTAAFL
Income from Google AdWords is probably the most democratic AND transparent method.
"When a publisher gets paid by advertisers, those advertisers have tremendous influence over what gets published. "
Don't you think this depends greatly on how it's done? Put a Google AdWords block on the main template and everything is generated via computer. Sure, a Pepsi ad MIGHT show up on the Coke page, but there's no "influence" between that and the individuals who write the page content.
Slashdot Mirror
"If it was any older than 12 (twelve), I'd reject them..."
Wish you'd reconsider that, as I was probably 40 or so before I got into C/C++. My first programing was done on an IBM System/3 (RPG, COBOL, FORTRAN, Assembly) located in the basement of my high school (6 semesters of CS, class of '75). Owned my own computer since '78.
Have done the above, plus DEC PDP-8e assembly, DEC PDP-11 assembly, 6502 assem, 68K assem, a multitude of BASICs (including a couple of interpreters that I wrote myself), Forth (don't ask), Smalltalk, Pascal, Object-Pascal, C, C++, Java, Objective-C, CF, .NET, some PHP, and played with quite a few others here and there. (The Apple/Mac track is probably showing through.) Written languages, business software, commercial shrink-wrapped applications, client/server stuff, drivers, and, of course, web-based systems.
Just goes to show that hard and fast rules run often up against boundary conditions... (grin)
"Computing these days is vastly more complex then back in the "good old days". Your 386 couldn't even play an mp3...."
Guess that depends on how you define complex, since today you're probably doing something like...
player=system.getMediaPlayerObject();
player.play('xyz.mp3');
Systems have gotten more complex true, but you also tend to have bigger building blocks to play with.
"The risk of data corruption is also present."
And fire, or humidity, or simple loss/misplacement/theft can easily cause the destruction of paper or film (x-rays). Six of one...
BTW, Elizabeth Warren, the primary author of The Two Income Trap, is the Leo Gottlieb Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.
As a Harvard Law professor, I suspect that her credentials in the matter are just a little more substantial than your own...
"However, with 2 earners you're only losing 40-60% of your household income in the face of a layoff, versus 100% for a 1 income. This makes a 2 earner household more resilient."
A two earner household is only more resilient if, and only if, it can stay afloat for a significant period of time on a single salary. If, as the parent implies, they need BOTH salaries to make the mortgage payment, the car payments, pay the student loans and the credit cards and the other bills, THEN they are susceptible to the Two Income Trap. Lose just one salary in that case, and the ship begins to take on water and sink.
Further, you tend to imply that gross overspending is the major cause behind bankruptcy, when in fact two of the major triggers are job loss and medical problems. Get sick, or involved in a significant accident, and one wage earner can lose their job just when they're getting hit with major medical expenses. Children are a issue too, but often because parents buy that "two income" house in order to be closer to better schools.
If at all possible, it's best to try to keep base expenses within the range of a single salary, and use the second for savings and investments, vacations, eating out, supporting hobbies, and so on. Then, and only then, is a two earner household truly "more resilient" and not susceptible to "the trap".
"If you're able to pay for it, including the externalities, then it should be your choice."
And like I said, your personal choice often has a significant impact on everyone else. Add up all the personal "choices" from driving gas hogging SUVs, and suddenly our trade deficit shoots up by billions of dollars, we end up spending trillions of dollars, years, and lives in a war started primarily to "stabilize" our supply of oil, we create massive amounts of CO2 and smog, and on, and on.
In a modern society one often has to deal with the fact that the world doesn't revolve solely around you, and you're not free to make every choice (murder, theft, speeding, polution, whatever) your little black heart desires.
That's the same illogic used to rationalize driving big trucks and SUVs. It's "my" choice and if I choose to do so, then who are you to say different?
Unfortunately, all of those individual "choices" add up, drive up prices, and generally impact everyone else.
Yep, they should definitely place the dollar cost savings on the package.
I mean, it's not like different places pay different rates for energy............
"Letting the American taxpayer keep their money, in the form of reduced income taxes and reduce capital gains taxes..."
As said above, that money will in most cases simply get exported when the "American taxpayer" uses the extra cash to buy a new flatscreen TV. Which was really what was wrong with Bush's "stimulus check".
At the very least, spending money on infrastructure means that, when we're done, we have something HERE to show for our dollars.
"unskilled labor"
Yeah, reward the uneducated high school dropouts...
"The report is therefore saying that investing 30 billion could result in ZERO "new" jobs, it will merely allow the retention of existing jobs."
Picking one extreme. On the other it could in fact create an additonal 212,000 jobs.
Or, even worst case, and viewed from anther angle, it could prevent 212,000 jobs from being lost; stopping 212,000 people from hitting welfare and unemployment.
"I'd rather see the old-fashioned boring infrastructure fixed/updated..."
And I'd rather scale defense spending back a bit and do both. Once constructed, new roads and bridges aren't going to help much in maintaining our gloal competitiveness, nor are they likely to generate much in the way of future jobs and income.
Further, ubiquitous FiOS-level speeds would enable brand new businesses and business models. It's a game changer.
"Someone who makes $120k is not spending 100% of their paycheck- not even close. They're putting a fair amount into long and short term savings."
And??? You think the money just disappears at that point? Or is it used to buy stocks and bonds, and taken by banks and invested in loans and other financial instruments?
That money goes into "the economy" too.
"...nor should it give you an increased volume in any competent design."
Nice qualifier. Wrong, but nice nonetheless. A removable LiPo battery needs a rather substantial case, as throwing raw lithium cells into your briefcase to rattle around as they please is... well, let's just say that it's a no-no. Further, you now need a compartment (back, sides) in which to contain said battery, as exposing raw circuit boards to users also tends to be contra-indicated.
With the container and compartment gone, you're now free to play with the shape of the cells, snugging them in and around other components, and making better use of the available nooks and crannies.
A few extra millimeters here, a few centimeters there, and volume-wise things start to add up pretty quickly. A battery 5cm x 10cm x 1cm is 50 cubic cms. Gain just an extra half centimeter in each dimension (5.5*10.5*1.5), and you've got 86.6 cubic cms... a 42% increase.
You made my point. There is no "unified gospel". No single point of view. No one size fits all.
The fact that there's 350 comments debating the issue is another case in point. You may want free software. I may not care as long as it works. The guy next door doesn't seem to mind paying. So having a "unified vision of an ideal" just isn't going to happen.
The only consensus is that there's no consensus.
The AirPort Express has an audio mini-jack built into the device. iTunes picks up on it right away. How do you think AirTunes works?
All depends on how you read the fine print. The iPhone is rated for 300-400 full power charges before dropping below 90%. Four nights of quarter power recharges roughly equals one full cycle.
So, in essence, it depends on your personal usage cycle as to how long it will last.
First, the article is discussing their new 17" 1920x1200 notebook. There's no use having a desktop replacement notebook with a screen that size if you're not "comfortable" using it.
Second, if you really have that much crap to plug into your computer (everyone always goes for the worst case), then get a friggin' DESKTOP machine and stop compromising with notebook-scale components and limitations on processors, RAM, and hard drives. Add a smaller notebook for on the go situations and you're set.
Which, BTW, is what I do. I have a 24" iMac for work, and a 15" MBP for travel. (I also did the wireless bit with an older 17" MBP, so I know it works. Set it down, pop in the mag safe, and I was off to the races.)
Finally, I tried the new "mag safe" monitor at an Apple store, and it takes maybe two seconds with the new connectors to plug in power, monitor, and USB. Even quicker to disconnect. Which, BTW, is a major advantage over my old Dell which DID have a slid in dock, and from which unlocking and disconnecting was a major procedure.
Docks are not all they're made out to be either...
Because with Apple the AirPort Express is your "dock", as most of what you're asking for can already be done wirelessly. Plug your speakers and your printer into your Express, and you're good to go the second you set your notebook down.
Use a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. No wires. Do Time Machine backups to Time Capsule. No wires. Actual, physical wires are so... '80s.
"...but there still needs to be a unified vision of an ideal to work towards."
Ah... you realize that this is the OPEN SOURCE sofware community we're talking about, don't you? They can't even agree on a unified desktop.
Because Stallman is busy trying to push his viewpoint down everyone else's throat. Hence the article.
"...not because the corporation that built it told it to break."
Actually, I just read the last company doing VHS tape production is folding up operations...
At least in that case you KNOW a major portion of its income comes from Google, and the community can perform additional oversite on those sorts of articles.
As is, Wiki is supported by private donations. Who know if, per your earlier example, Pepsi is already passing in money (and gaining influence) under the table? Maybe the Coke article is already biased... and you don't even know it. One can make the same case against ANY funding source (such as government grants), but the fact of the matter is that the servers need power and bandwidth, and the money needed to do so has to come from SOMEWHERE. TANSTAAFL
Income from Google AdWords is probably the most democratic AND transparent method.
And like your VHS tapes, EDGE hasn't stopped working either. They may get slower connections, but it still works.
If want to complain about somethng, why not complain about the fact that, very soon, the old TV connected to that VCR is going to stop working...
"When a publisher gets paid by advertisers, those advertisers have tremendous influence over what gets published. "
Don't you think this depends greatly on how it's done? Put a Google AdWords block on the main template and everything is generated via computer. Sure, a Pepsi ad MIGHT show up on the Coke page, but there's no "influence" between that and the individuals who write the page content.