It's not about giving out welfare or not giving out welfare in this case. It's about what hoops they make people jump through to get the money. With minimum income, there's no hoops to jump through. You don't have to prove you are trying to find work, and they don't have to police the people receiving the money to ensure they are trying to find work, or whatever other types of roadblocks they come up with. The system costs less to run because there is so much less bureaucracy. People will generally want to find a job, as minimum income isn't generally a very comfortable lifestyle.
That's probably the only way to ensure that money isn't horded, no matter who is doing the hording. Possibly they will just try to horde it out of the country.
I don't think there's a good solution to "how do you stop X from hording money". Money by it's very nature has a habit of growing when well managed. This is probably why you can never get rid of the 1% problem. Once you have a considerable more amount of money than the average Joe, even like $5 million, as long as you manage it well, that money will only grow more. Eventually that $5 million becomes $25 million. And then you pass it on to your kids. If they don't mismanage it, it will probably grow to $100 million in their lifetime. Another generation or two and they are billionaires. This is especially true with smaller families with a smaller number of children to divide the wealth between. About the best you can hope for is that the children who didn't earn the money in the first place will mismanage the money and blow it all.
You could tax it at very high rates, but then you'd lose incentive for people to grow their $5 million to $25 million. If you're going to tax it, then just sit on the money and enjoy your life. If you have to work exponentially harder to get a very small amount of money, why bother exhausting yourself.
We have precisely one seat of MS Office which is on my personal laptop that we can bust out if there is an emergency but the last time I did that was about 2-3 years ago. Unless you are already an MS Office shop or have a very specific use case where you need it, you can exist quite happily without it.
You see, this can't work in a large organization. It's fine in a small company to have a single computer with MS Office for emergencies. But once you have 100 or 1000 employees, having everybody go through a single chokepoint to get access to MS Office just isn't worth it. When employees are making $50,000 a year, it's not a big deal on the balance sheet when you are spending $100 a year on an MS Office license. You don't even need an license for everyone. Just one for the people who are likely to contact those outside the organization.
I'd rather just have IE on windows phone then any browser I've ever tried on android. Chrome, Firefox, I've tried many different ones, and none of them holds candle to IE.
I think the biggest problem is having Android as a starting point. In my experience, Android is just terrible on battery life. Something about the way it works that just lets apps suck down the battery. I had and Android phone, and replaced it with a Windows Phone
My old Android phone would easily be out of battery by the end of the day with a similarly sized battery. I usually plugged it in at work because otherwise the battery wouldn't make it to the end of the day. The Windows phone with the same usage patters isn't even below 60% by the end of the day most days. It's also really nice in the fact that if I just leave it sitting on the desk all day, the battery will only go down about 5%, whereas Android would still drain the battery even if you didn't touch it.
After I got the new Windows phone, I did a factory reset on my old Android phone, it easily had a battery life of 3 days. Until I logged back into my Google account on the thing (just connected my account, not even installing apps). Then it was back to it's old tricks and draining the battery over the course of a single day, just sitting on my desk doing nothing.
I tried to find a driver, but couldn't find one that worked well. It was some mobile AMD video chip. Tried the open source drivers as well as the closed ones, and nothing seemed to work. Seems I got some weird model that nobody wanted to support in Linux.
Like I said, Linux can work fine if you happen to have the right hardware, or research the hardware before you buy it, but in my experience, if you just pick a random desktop or laptop you got at the local Best Buy (which is how many people obtain computers) there will be something that just won't work.
Personally, I don't even care for office suites at home. I can't remember that last time I actually used one. Last time I wanted to use an office suite, I used Libre Office and it got the job done just fine. What's actually holding me back from using Linux at home is hardware support.
There's always something that doesn't work on my computers. The last time I tried to install it, it was the video drivers that didn't work. They worked well enough to run the desktop, but as soon as I tried to play a game (or even test with GLXgears) the performance was abysmal. Other computers had problems with the wireless cards not working correctly. I'm sure if I picked a computer specifically checking that each of the components would work with Linux, then I could get a machine that worked properly, but that's a lot of effort to put into building a computer.
There's also a much smaller selection of games that run on Linux. I know there are a lot more games than there used to be, but with Windows I don't have to wonder if the next big game is going to support my operating system, because all the games will support my operating system. With office suites you can swap one for another and not really have a problem. When I want to play a game, I want to play a specific game, not some other game that kind of has the same gameplay mechanics.
The other difference is that a light bulb and a Pentium 4 have much different operating temperatures. A light bulb has no problem operating with a surface temperature (the temperature of the glass) of 100 degrees celcius, while the maximum operating temperature of the CPU is around 70 degrees celcius.
I think most people forget to count in deaths from the mining of uranium, while at the same time they count the deaths from pollution caused by pollution generated from coal. I think it's going a but far when counting deaths from using tailings in concrete, as it doesn't have anything to do with the actual sourcing of the fuel, or production of the power. Also, that is just so beyond stupid, and I can't believe somebody would be stupid enough to even propose such an idea.
It's not Microsoft's fault. Pretty much any operating system can have this problem. There's a version of Cryptolocker that attacks Mac OSX machines as well. Unless you want to be stuck inside something like iOS, where you can only run an approved list of programs, then you're going to end up with people who run anything and everything causing security problems for themselves.
In criminal law, entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit
It doesn't count as entrapment if you just use the usual method to book the Uber car. If the guy is signed up as an Uber driver, and being an Uber driver is against the law, then the driver is obviously previously disposed to commit the crime. There might be more of a case if they stopped a random guy on the street and offered him $50 to drive him a couple miles down the road. Who wouldn't pass up that offer?
I agree. I'm currently paying $40 a month for Unlimited talk, text, and data ( 5GB at full speed), with caller ID and voicemail. I'm in Canada on Wind. Only downside is that it's only unlimited when I'm in the city. Works great for me since I don't tend to travel that much, and I'm not going to pay every month for something that I will only use a couple weeks out of the year.
Exactly. If you build an app, and nobody buys it, you have pretty much just wasted time, but probably aren't out much in terms of cash. If you make a physical product and nobody buys it, you're probably out a lot of money at that point. This is why everybody wants to get into software development. There's a huge potential to make a product once, and sell it a million times, without any ongoing costs. No physical product allows you to do that.
When MS shakes things up enough to annoy their users, you know that they've missed the mark pretty badly.
I really don't agree on that one. I find that most non technically oriented users have almost no tolerance for any change whatsoever. They've managed to memorize how to operate their computer, and if a single thing goes out of place, they flip their lid.
Are you saying that because there are alternatives, that the interface sucks? Maybe it's just that people have different preferences. Linux distros often (or used to) come with 4 or 5 different window managers, and all were extremely different in how they went about managing the UI. When this happens in Linux, it's awesome, look at all the choice we have. When this happens in Windows, it's because Microsoft is stupid, and the interface they created sucks.
You could basically say the same thing about any new feature. "We don't know if it's secure yet, so we just shouldn't use it" is a ridiculous way go about life. If we all took that view, we wouldn't be able to add new features for anything.
But high performance is relative to all the other people working. If a significant percentage of the people work 60 hours a week to reach a certain level of performance, then anybody else in the company either has to be extremely talented in a way that would allow them to work 40 hours a week and still produce as much as the other guys, or they have to work 60 hours to keep up with everyone else.
At some level, working more hours just won't yield extra performance, and you will be over tired, such as trying to work 130 hours a week, vs 110 hours a week, but there's probably a big push that gets people working 50+ hours a week just to keep up with everyone else.
What security risk is that? Is there anything specific that live tiles can do that can't be accomplish while the app is running? Are they any less secure than running native apps? What about native apps that leave an old school notification icon running or native apps that install services?
MS has no control over what PC vendors install on the machines after they install Windows. If they tried to exert that kind of control, I'm sure more than a few people would scream "monopoly". The PC vendors themselves are the ones who choose to install junkware on the machines. Microsoft is even starting to push their signature edition PCs without all the junkware loaded on to try and get their good name back. I think MS would like nothing better than to be able for people to have a good experience with their Windows computers, but Lenovo, HP, Dell and others are ruining the experience in the name of ever lower PC prices, no matter what the experience.
For the few times in my life that I need to print color, I'll just take the files down to the local print shop and have them do it for me. It's not worth my time or money to have a color printer at home, or even in the office. It's not even worth the space it takes up, even if it does end up cheaper for me to buy a new printer every time. I have a cheap black and white laser printer for home. I guess some people print often enough that it's worth it to have a color printer of their own, but for the vast majority of people, it's just not even close to worth it.
You may not see a line item price for the OS when you buy a machine from Dell, HP, or Lenovo, but they are paying Microsoft for the license that comes on almost every machine sold. It's a lower price then what regular consumers would pay if they built their own computer, but the is still a very large amount of money coming into Microsoft from all those PCs, laptops, and tablets being sold with Windows preinstalled.
Personally, I really like what they've done with Windows 10. And I really like their Phone OS. The OS by itself is actually really nice. There is an app shortage, but I have no complaints about the hardware or the OS itself. If they can really make it easy to port iOS and Android apps to Windows Phone 10, as is their stated plan, then I could really see Windows phone catching on. It's so much better than Android and iOS, at least in my opinion.
Yet still New Hampshire has one of the lowest rates of uninsured drivers at 11%. Mind you, if you opt to not get insurance, you are still on the hook for costs of bodily injury or property damage resulting from a car accident you caused.
Personally, I think that car insurance, like house insurance is one of those things you are stupid not to get, even if it isn't required. You stand to lose a whole lot of money if something goes wrong. In the case of a car, that could be accidentally running over a person or crashing into expensive property. In the case of a house, if your house catches on fire, or somebody steals all your stuff. There cost of liability and theft insurance is usually very low for houses and cars, and it's pretty stupid to not get it, even if it isn't mandatory by law.
This is especially true for these "flagship" phones. Give me something really impressive rather than some gimmick. I think that Nokia was the only one who got anything close to this wit their 42 megapixel camera on a phone. Everybody else is just making it thinner or adding gimmicks like the edge screen that are fun for the first 10 minutes and then eventually don't actually provide any useful features.
How about sticking an actually actual SSD into a phone. Those things are getting pretty small. It would be great if my phone had a real, upgradeable SSD in it. Add a real camera lens with an actual flash (non of this LED nonsense). Really somebody should be making a phone that can substitute for an actual computer when you're in a pinch, it should be able to connect to all the peripherals (keyboard, mouse, monitor). Maybe it only works in this mode when it's plugged in. But it should be possible. As it stands right now, you don't get anything extra real features out of buying a $700 phone then you do when you buy the $200 phone. And in some cases like removable storage and battery, you actually get less for your money.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not about giving out welfare or not giving out welfare in this case. It's about what hoops they make people jump through to get the money. With minimum income, there's no hoops to jump through. You don't have to prove you are trying to find work, and they don't have to police the people receiving the money to ensure they are trying to find work, or whatever other types of roadblocks they come up with. The system costs less to run because there is so much less bureaucracy. People will generally want to find a job, as minimum income isn't generally a very comfortable lifestyle.
That's probably the only way to ensure that money isn't horded, no matter who is doing the hording. Possibly they will just try to horde it out of the country.
I don't think there's a good solution to "how do you stop X from hording money". Money by it's very nature has a habit of growing when well managed. This is probably why you can never get rid of the 1% problem. Once you have a considerable more amount of money than the average Joe, even like $5 million, as long as you manage it well, that money will only grow more. Eventually that $5 million becomes $25 million. And then you pass it on to your kids. If they don't mismanage it, it will probably grow to $100 million in their lifetime. Another generation or two and they are billionaires. This is especially true with smaller families with a smaller number of children to divide the wealth between. About the best you can hope for is that the children who didn't earn the money in the first place will mismanage the money and blow it all.
You could tax it at very high rates, but then you'd lose incentive for people to grow their $5 million to $25 million. If you're going to tax it, then just sit on the money and enjoy your life. If you have to work exponentially harder to get a very small amount of money, why bother exhausting yourself.
You see, this can't work in a large organization. It's fine in a small company to have a single computer with MS Office for emergencies. But once you have 100 or 1000 employees, having everybody go through a single chokepoint to get access to MS Office just isn't worth it. When employees are making $50,000 a year, it's not a big deal on the balance sheet when you are spending $100 a year on an MS Office license. You don't even need an license for everyone. Just one for the people who are likely to contact those outside the organization.
I'd rather just have IE on windows phone then any browser I've ever tried on android. Chrome, Firefox, I've tried many different ones, and none of them holds candle to IE.
I think the biggest problem is having Android as a starting point. In my experience, Android is just terrible on battery life. Something about the way it works that just lets apps suck down the battery. I had and Android phone, and replaced it with a Windows Phone
My old Android phone would easily be out of battery by the end of the day with a similarly sized battery. I usually plugged it in at work because otherwise the battery wouldn't make it to the end of the day. The Windows phone with the same usage patters isn't even below 60% by the end of the day most days. It's also really nice in the fact that if I just leave it sitting on the desk all day, the battery will only go down about 5%, whereas Android would still drain the battery even if you didn't touch it.
After I got the new Windows phone, I did a factory reset on my old Android phone, it easily had a battery life of 3 days. Until I logged back into my Google account on the thing (just connected my account, not even installing apps). Then it was back to it's old tricks and draining the battery over the course of a single day, just sitting on my desk doing nothing.
I tried to find a driver, but couldn't find one that worked well. It was some mobile AMD video chip. Tried the open source drivers as well as the closed ones, and nothing seemed to work. Seems I got some weird model that nobody wanted to support in Linux.
Like I said, Linux can work fine if you happen to have the right hardware, or research the hardware before you buy it, but in my experience, if you just pick a random desktop or laptop you got at the local Best Buy (which is how many people obtain computers) there will be something that just won't work.
Personally, I don't even care for office suites at home. I can't remember that last time I actually used one. Last time I wanted to use an office suite, I used Libre Office and it got the job done just fine. What's actually holding me back from using Linux at home is hardware support.
There's always something that doesn't work on my computers. The last time I tried to install it, it was the video drivers that didn't work. They worked well enough to run the desktop, but as soon as I tried to play a game (or even test with GLXgears) the performance was abysmal. Other computers had problems with the wireless cards not working correctly. I'm sure if I picked a computer specifically checking that each of the components would work with Linux, then I could get a machine that worked properly, but that's a lot of effort to put into building a computer.
There's also a much smaller selection of games that run on Linux. I know there are a lot more games than there used to be, but with Windows I don't have to wonder if the next big game is going to support my operating system, because all the games will support my operating system. With office suites you can swap one for another and not really have a problem. When I want to play a game, I want to play a specific game, not some other game that kind of has the same gameplay mechanics.
The other difference is that a light bulb and a Pentium 4 have much different operating temperatures. A light bulb has no problem operating with a surface temperature (the temperature of the glass) of 100 degrees celcius, while the maximum operating temperature of the CPU is around 70 degrees celcius.
I think most people forget to count in deaths from the mining of uranium, while at the same time they count the deaths from pollution caused by pollution generated from coal. I think it's going a but far when counting deaths from using tailings in concrete, as it doesn't have anything to do with the actual sourcing of the fuel, or production of the power. Also, that is just so beyond stupid, and I can't believe somebody would be stupid enough to even propose such an idea.
It's not Microsoft's fault. Pretty much any operating system can have this problem. There's a version of Cryptolocker that attacks Mac OSX machines as well. Unless you want to be stuck inside something like iOS, where you can only run an approved list of programs, then you're going to end up with people who run anything and everything causing security problems for themselves.
Pulled this definition from Google.
It doesn't count as entrapment if you just use the usual method to book the Uber car. If the guy is signed up as an Uber driver, and being an Uber driver is against the law, then the driver is obviously previously disposed to commit the crime. There might be more of a case if they stopped a random guy on the street and offered him $50 to drive him a couple miles down the road. Who wouldn't pass up that offer?
I agree. I'm currently paying $40 a month for Unlimited talk, text, and data ( 5GB at full speed), with caller ID and voicemail. I'm in Canada on Wind. Only downside is that it's only unlimited when I'm in the city. Works great for me since I don't tend to travel that much, and I'm not going to pay every month for something that I will only use a couple weeks out of the year.
Exactly. If you build an app, and nobody buys it, you have pretty much just wasted time, but probably aren't out much in terms of cash. If you make a physical product and nobody buys it, you're probably out a lot of money at that point. This is why everybody wants to get into software development. There's a huge potential to make a product once, and sell it a million times, without any ongoing costs. No physical product allows you to do that.
I really don't agree on that one. I find that most non technically oriented users have almost no tolerance for any change whatsoever. They've managed to memorize how to operate their computer, and if a single thing goes out of place, they flip their lid.
Are you saying that because there are alternatives, that the interface sucks? Maybe it's just that people have different preferences. Linux distros often (or used to) come with 4 or 5 different window managers, and all were extremely different in how they went about managing the UI. When this happens in Linux, it's awesome, look at all the choice we have. When this happens in Windows, it's because Microsoft is stupid, and the interface they created sucks.
Why wouldn't everything be a security risk?
You could basically say the same thing about any new feature. "We don't know if it's secure yet, so we just shouldn't use it" is a ridiculous way go about life. If we all took that view, we wouldn't be able to add new features for anything.
But high performance is relative to all the other people working. If a significant percentage of the people work 60 hours a week to reach a certain level of performance, then anybody else in the company either has to be extremely talented in a way that would allow them to work 40 hours a week and still produce as much as the other guys, or they have to work 60 hours to keep up with everyone else.
At some level, working more hours just won't yield extra performance, and you will be over tired, such as trying to work 130 hours a week, vs 110 hours a week, but there's probably a big push that gets people working 50+ hours a week just to keep up with everyone else.
What security risk is that? Is there anything specific that live tiles can do that can't be accomplish while the app is running? Are they any less secure than running native apps? What about native apps that leave an old school notification icon running or native apps that install services?
MS has no control over what PC vendors install on the machines after they install Windows. If they tried to exert that kind of control, I'm sure more than a few people would scream "monopoly". The PC vendors themselves are the ones who choose to install junkware on the machines. Microsoft is even starting to push their signature edition PCs without all the junkware loaded on to try and get their good name back. I think MS would like nothing better than to be able for people to have a good experience with their Windows computers, but Lenovo, HP, Dell and others are ruining the experience in the name of ever lower PC prices, no matter what the experience.
For the few times in my life that I need to print color, I'll just take the files down to the local print shop and have them do it for me. It's not worth my time or money to have a color printer at home, or even in the office. It's not even worth the space it takes up, even if it does end up cheaper for me to buy a new printer every time. I have a cheap black and white laser printer for home. I guess some people print often enough that it's worth it to have a color printer of their own, but for the vast majority of people, it's just not even close to worth it.
When I here ADA, I think of The Americans With Disabilities Act.
You may not see a line item price for the OS when you buy a machine from Dell, HP, or Lenovo, but they are paying Microsoft for the license that comes on almost every machine sold. It's a lower price then what regular consumers would pay if they built their own computer, but the is still a very large amount of money coming into Microsoft from all those PCs, laptops, and tablets being sold with Windows preinstalled.
Personally, I really like what they've done with Windows 10. And I really like their Phone OS. The OS by itself is actually really nice. There is an app shortage, but I have no complaints about the hardware or the OS itself. If they can really make it easy to port iOS and Android apps to Windows Phone 10, as is their stated plan, then I could really see Windows phone catching on. It's so much better than Android and iOS, at least in my opinion.
Canada did it first, And it's country-wide. It can also do speeds as high as 100 Gbit/s but generally operated at 10 Gbit/s.
Yet still New Hampshire has one of the lowest rates of uninsured drivers at 11%. Mind you, if you opt to not get insurance, you are still on the hook for costs of bodily injury or property damage resulting from a car accident you caused.
Personally, I think that car insurance, like house insurance is one of those things you are stupid not to get, even if it isn't required. You stand to lose a whole lot of money if something goes wrong. In the case of a car, that could be accidentally running over a person or crashing into expensive property. In the case of a house, if your house catches on fire, or somebody steals all your stuff. There cost of liability and theft insurance is usually very low for houses and cars, and it's pretty stupid to not get it, even if it isn't mandatory by law.
This is especially true for these "flagship" phones. Give me something really impressive rather than some gimmick. I think that Nokia was the only one who got anything close to this wit their 42 megapixel camera on a phone. Everybody else is just making it thinner or adding gimmicks like the edge screen that are fun for the first 10 minutes and then eventually don't actually provide any useful features.
How about sticking an actually actual SSD into a phone. Those things are getting pretty small. It would be great if my phone had a real, upgradeable SSD in it. Add a real camera lens with an actual flash (non of this LED nonsense). Really somebody should be making a phone that can substitute for an actual computer when you're in a pinch, it should be able to connect to all the peripherals (keyboard, mouse, monitor). Maybe it only works in this mode when it's plugged in. But it should be possible. As it stands right now, you don't get anything extra real features out of buying a $700 phone then you do when you buy the $200 phone. And in some cases like removable storage and battery, you actually get less for your money.