I'm deeply concerned that the court is being the RIAA's pawn and making orders that have no other purpose than to protect a slimy group of companies' public image...
Similarly, saying "the market will provide more power stations", well yes it will - eventually, in the meantime while the market is getting to the point where more power is required, you're suffering brownouts. Besides, it is often in the market's interest to let you suffer like that as they you will pay more.
No, the market has no "interest". What you're describing is not a market at all, it's what happens when a regulated business can't let the market do the right thing and raise the price on a product that is in such high demand that the supply can't keep up. If we were dealing with a market, this wouldn't be a problem.
Sometimes you need more forward planning and organisation than market forces allow.
Right..... Geeze, can you point to even one instance where that was the case? I'll let you draw from the entirety of history.
It was only $65 Billion on paper. Remember that the gains were imaginary. The estimate I saw this morning was that there was only $13 Billion in actual principal invested. Most of the money probably went to pay off earlier investors. The rest was spent by Madoff and friends.
You're missing a really big point here, as are most others who replied to me.
$13B is in the same order of magnitude as $65B. Let me amend my earlier post.
Seriously, it's impossible to get rid of $13 Billion without having something valuable to show for it. So far they've gathered the low 9 figures of $ from him, around 1-2% of the money.
See how little changed? He and his friends could not have spent it without having something really big and really valuable to show for it. You can't blow money like that on beer and fishing boats, this isn't the lottery.
Seriously, it's impossible to get rid of $65 Billion without having something valuable to show for it. So far they've gathered the low 9 figures of $ from him, less than 1% of the money.
Court also ruled that the individual school officials could not be held personally liable
If the courts won't hold them liable, than the people must!
That was my first thought. My grandfather told a story one time of his teacher doing something humiliating to him at school. When he told his mother, she went to school with a hatchet in hand. She didn't use it, but the problem was resolved.
I don't recommend doing something that extreme, but it's obvious that people are too much of sheep nowadays to fix these problems. Honestly, this shouldn't have involved a court to begin with. Those responsible should have been publicly humiliated and forced to resign.
And what long term investment would that be that reliably makes 5%? If he had invested that $38k in just about any stock or mutual fund in the past year, he'd have lost at least 30% of its value.
The stock market would be that long-term investment. The DJIA has averaged 12%/year for the last 70 years or so. Yes, there are dips every now and then, but that doesn't change the long-term. You're arguing against the "long-term" using the "short-term", which doesn't make sense.
The guy who spent $38,000 to save $3,000 is really bad with math if he thinks he's "saving" anything. That money would have served him better in the stock market. Still, there's more to this than money, and if he feels that it's useful to be using solar energy, it's not a bad idea. I like it myself.
But it cannot be argued from a purely numerical standpoint.
I have a freaking huge customer (multi-national Fortune 100) that has mandated IE 6. Ouch ouch ouch. As a developer of web sites, I have to keep Win 98 in a VM on my laptop to test in IE 6.
IE 8 does not thrill me, as I now have to worry about 3 IE browsers.
Here I thought we were supposed to encourage people to move back into cities so high population densities would make mass transit more viable. Silly me.
Yes, silly you. Flint isn't a ghost town due to people moving to its suburbs - it's a ghost town due to people simply leaving the area.
I agree that this whole thing sounds like a disaster - how do you get the last guy in the neighborhood to leave? - but your reasoning is confused.
Hmmm...Interesting - but why only on Urinals? Why not in the stalls in BOTH sexes of restrooms?
Either way, this confirms that I don't really want to make the US as a destination when I make trips from Australia to Canada...
It's all cool - we have enough gullible people here without you...
Maintenance (4.67 cents per mile on a medium car) and Tires (0.85 cents per mile on a medium car).
Yeah, that's about right. I have 60,000 mile tires on my car, and I paid about $48,000 for them. They actually gave me the car for free with the tires!
That bullshit figure alone probably explains the complete bullshit number pointed out by the submitter...
Emotion is only brought in when people can't argue based on facts. You don't have the facts on your side, and you know it. Thus your first paragraph and the "knee deep" part. If emotion is more important that logic for you, then, good luck. I'm more interested in what's correct, and this is an issue where I can arrive at that conclusion based on facts.
and both sides trot out numbers, facts, that support their assertions
Bad example. Those against gun control have no facts to support their position, so they make emotional arguments. When they do try to honestly use facts, they end up like Gary Kleck.
No need to be a law geek, the Constitution is an easy read.
Article I, Section 8 includes the "interstate commerce clause":
"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
Later, in Amendment 10:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Since regulating interstate commerce is specifically given to the federal government above, it's not allowed by the states.
It's sad that people even feel the need to debate the plain language that this is written in.
His kangaroo trial was conducted by Vichy Iraqis at our urging.
Besides -- if his trial didn't meet our standards, we should have condemned the result anyway. Principles don't have geographic boundaries.
I know. Without a decent trial, it's hard to say who did it, and I'm concerned that the *real* dictator may still be on the loose while we killed an innocent man.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm deeply concerned that the court is being the RIAA's pawn and making orders that have no other purpose than to protect a slimy group of companies' public image...
Similarly, saying "the market will provide more power stations", well yes it will - eventually, in the meantime while the market is getting to the point where more power is required, you're suffering brownouts. Besides, it is often in the market's interest to let you suffer like that as they you will pay more.
No, the market has no "interest". What you're describing is not a market at all, it's what happens when a regulated business can't let the market do the right thing and raise the price on a product that is in such high demand that the supply can't keep up. If we were dealing with a market, this wouldn't be a problem.
Sometimes you need more forward planning and organisation than market forces allow.
Right..... Geeze, can you point to even one instance where that was the case? I'll let you draw from the entirety of history.
It was only $65 Billion on paper. Remember that the gains were imaginary. The estimate I saw this morning was that there was only $13 Billion in actual principal invested. Most of the money probably went to pay off earlier investors. The rest was spent by Madoff and friends.
You're missing a really big point here, as are most others who replied to me.
$13B is in the same order of magnitude as $65B. Let me amend my earlier post.
Seriously, it's impossible to get rid of $13 Billion without having something valuable to show for it. So far they've gathered the low 9 figures of $ from him, around 1-2% of the money.
See how little changed? He and his friends could not have spent it without having something really big and really valuable to show for it. You can't blow money like that on beer and fishing boats, this isn't the lottery.
Seriously, it's impossible to get rid of $65 Billion without having something valuable to show for it. So far they've gathered the low 9 figures of $ from him, less than 1% of the money.
Court also ruled that the individual school officials could not be held personally liable
If the courts won't hold them liable, than the people must!
That was my first thought. My grandfather told a story one time of his teacher doing something humiliating to him at school. When he told his mother, she went to school with a hatchet in hand. She didn't use it, but the problem was resolved.
I don't recommend doing something that extreme, but it's obvious that people are too much of sheep nowadays to fix these problems. Honestly, this shouldn't have involved a court to begin with. Those responsible should have been publicly humiliated and forced to resign.
And what long term investment would that be that reliably makes 5%? If he had invested that $38k in just about any stock or mutual fund in the past year, he'd have lost at least 30% of its value.
The stock market would be that long-term investment. The DJIA has averaged 12%/year for the last 70 years or so. Yes, there are dips every now and then, but that doesn't change the long-term. You're arguing against the "long-term" using the "short-term", which doesn't make sense.
The guy who spent $38,000 to save $3,000 is really bad with math if he thinks he's "saving" anything. That money would have served him better in the stock market. Still, there's more to this than money, and if he feels that it's useful to be using solar energy, it's not a bad idea. I like it myself.
But it cannot be argued from a purely numerical standpoint.
I have a freaking huge customer (multi-national Fortune 100) that has mandated IE 6. Ouch ouch ouch. As a developer of web sites, I have to keep Win 98 in a VM on my laptop to test in IE 6.
IE 8 does not thrill me, as I now have to worry about 3 IE browsers.
Yes, silly you. Flint isn't a ghost town due to people moving to its suburbs - it's a ghost town due to people simply leaving the area.
I agree that this whole thing sounds like a disaster - how do you get the last guy in the neighborhood to leave? - but your reasoning is confused.
Perhaps if MS was under the jurisdiction of the EU, they'll do what the DoJ should have done and will break it up into several MiniSofts.
Those would be "picosofts".
Hmmm...Interesting - but why only on Urinals? Why not in the stalls in BOTH sexes of restrooms? Either way, this confirms that I don't really want to make the US as a destination when I make trips from Australia to Canada...
It's all cool - we have enough gullible people here without you...
Math impaired troll is right. Mod me down- I screwed up and I have karma to burn...
Heh! I'm so used to seeing ".85 cents" really mean "$.85" that it doesn't even register anymore.
Oddly, the number is still high by about 25% at that.
Yeah, that's about right. I have 60,000 mile tires on my car, and I paid about $48,000 for them. They actually gave me the car for free with the tires!
That bullshit figure alone probably explains the complete bullshit number pointed out by the submitter...
Emotion is only brought in when people can't argue based on facts. You don't have the facts on your side, and you know it. Thus your first paragraph and the "knee deep" part. If emotion is more important that logic for you, then, good luck. I'm more interested in what's correct, and this is an issue where I can arrive at that conclusion based on facts.
With the Obamessiah as President, the rest of the world loves us, and we're going to be a respected part of the world community again.
Excuse me, my starry eyes are watering again, as if there's wool over them or something....
Bad example. Those against gun control have no facts to support their position, so they make emotional arguments. When they do try to honestly use facts, they end up like Gary Kleck.
" Amazon, though the leading e-book seller, has none"
phenomena, he must not be on Comcast. Just had a 5 minute freeze about 20 minutes ago...
Yeah, I noticed that at the bar last weekend.
It's become so bad that they had to drop to the singular.
Or are you trying to make one of your friends/enemies look dumb?
Yeah. I mean, it's not like McNealy's ever been arrogant in the past....
No need to be a law geek, the Constitution is an easy read.
Article I, Section 8 includes the "interstate commerce clause":
"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
Later, in Amendment 10:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Since regulating interstate commerce is specifically given to the federal government above, it's not allowed by the states.
It's sad that people even feel the need to debate the plain language that this is written in.
Bitchin'! You have managed to give the looney left the final piece of the chain to link reduced sunspot activity to George W. Bush.
His kangaroo trial was conducted by Vichy Iraqis at our urging.
Besides -- if his trial didn't meet our standards, we should have condemned the result anyway. Principles don't have geographic boundaries.
I know. Without a decent trial, it's hard to say who did it, and I'm concerned that the *real* dictator may still be on the loose while we killed an innocent man.