Broadcom does not even need to pay to make drivers. Open source the documentation and let others make the drivers.
Broadcom is trying to avoid the fact that they make a commodity product. If they would acknowledge that they do, they could benefit from drivers that were compatible with multiple vendors chipsets.
Just get it in writing. Been there done that, when it has to come down for hardware failure or something like that you can show you tried to get a backup machine, you tried to do things right.
The GP is more likely referring to NOx compliance killing off the concept of running an ICE lean. That was a common thing to do to gain milage at one time.
If you buy a game that has to connect to the company's servers they will at some point stop supporting that. You should know that up front. So long as you never want to play Medal of Duty 8: Call of Honor in a couple years feel free to buy, otherwise stay away.
So far I have just avoided buying these games. EA, Ubisoft and Blizzard have made it very clear they do not want my money. No problem I can spend it elsewhere.
Redistribution works by increasing the velocity of a given set of money. Sure too much can cause problems, and no not just that some people have more than other is not an issue. The problems only occur when demand is severely limited by too much wealth in the hands of too few.
The investments of the rich are not idle, but they do not magically lead to more jobs when they have more capital. Only demand can cause hiring. A lack of supply can restrict it, but that is not where we are right now. At this moment in time investments have low returns, I have money that could be invested sitting as cash (actual paper money, not in a bank) since the returns are just not worth it. From the economists point of view that is pretty bad, giving it to someone poorer would be one way to create some demand. Doing that would mean more opportunities to invest in companies that meet that new demand.
We have stifled demand and this is the result. I am only looking at one historical solution.
A minimum income like Milton Friedman proposed would I believe be the ideal solution. People would still work, for the extra money to improve their situation, and we would prevent a total loss of demand. Also I would be willing to then take more risk with my money since I would not have to worry about ending up in the poor house.
I am in favor of some gun control, like all rational gun owners are. Some people should not be allowed to own guns, children, the insane, violent felons.
The lower being the gun was always a bad idea. It should be the action.
For instance there is no point in arguing with someone who claims the earth is flat. Nor is there a need to go talk to the bum on the corner screaming about the aliens.
No, ideology is something you choose to believe even when reality conflicts with that. Principles are often tenants of an ideology. I am only interested in what works for the most and reduces harm, I do not care about anything else. If that means crack should be legal, fine, if it means we need to pay taxes to buy needles for junkies to keep them from clogging up the ER, fine. Ideology is for children.
Go read a history book and you will find yourself very guilty of that.
That is the part that is considered the gun when dealing with bolt actions.
Colt should never have been allowed to serialize the lower. You can make a lower out of sheet metal by hand. They are trivial to construct via many methods other than 3d printing.
So then what stops welfare from turning into that?
We have lots of people who either cannot or will not save for retirement. Most fall into that latter category. Your solution will grow welfare into the same size that SS is now.
The average wage is simply not enough to raise a family and save for retirement.
A lower without an upper is useless. That means all they have to do is update the law. Making barrels is still a lot harder to do, same with actions. The law is outdated and should regulate the parts that are hardest to produce.
So then why is welfare ok but not SS? Do you think welfare should be used for this purpose? That being the retirements of those without another option.
Look at the life of the average person before 1913 and get back to me.
We did not get a shorter work week until after 1913. Labor regulation did that, not any magical market.
Go visit puerto rico, pay close attention to all the homeless and those who serve you the drinks with the umbrellas in them. Ask them how they are saving for their retirement.
All the economic freedom in the world does not mean shit when you have no money.
Stop with the ideology. If we stop SS payments right now, people will be forced onto the street. That is a fact, unless you have some alterative for paying their bills.
For the most of human existence retirement did not exist. People worked until they died. That was it. There is no need to save for retirement when you die in the fields at 50 or in the mine at 45.
There exists a huge class of workers who literally could save every dime they don't spend on necessities and still not have enough to retire ever.
Even if you think they should try harder, or pull on their boot straps more or whatever fantasy you have, the reality is some people will never be able to save that kind of money. They just do not have the income to do so.
Without SS their will be old people begging in the streets. The simple fact is either through their own mistakes or by unfortunate circumstances many people will never have enough money to retire. When they can no longer work either we can help them or allow them to starve on the street. No amount of your ideology will change reality.
The free market does not raise all boats equally, that is a myth. Again, look at history not ideology.
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit.
Broadcom does not even need to pay to make drivers. Open source the documentation and let others make the drivers.
Broadcom is trying to avoid the fact that they make a commodity product. If they would acknowledge that they do, they could benefit from drivers that were compatible with multiple vendors chipsets.
That sucks.
Well, based on the recruiting calls I get might be about time to start looking again.
Why would the box hosting DNS need to stay up?
Mine could stay up that long, but there are a bunch of VMs doing that task so rebooting them is no big deal.
Linux, but no real not to do the same with FreeBSD.
Should have switched to Linux instead.
Actually no, that would mean less work for me.
Just get it in writing.
Been there done that, when it has to come down for hardware failure or something like that you can show you tried to get a backup machine, you tried to do things right.
The GP is more likely referring to NOx compliance killing off the concept of running an ICE lean. That was a common thing to do to gain milage at one time.
It will eventually.
If you buy a game that has to connect to the company's servers they will at some point stop supporting that. You should know that up front. So long as you never want to play Medal of Duty 8: Call of Honor in a couple years feel free to buy, otherwise stay away.
That seems like the rules all goods are already sold under.
All my imaginary mod points to you sir.
So far I have just avoided buying these games. EA, Ubisoft and Blizzard have made it very clear they do not want my money. No problem I can spend it elsewhere.
Gun powder is trivial to make. Especially for old black powder cowboy guns.
All this stuff was made in the 1800s so by today's standards it is all pretty simple.
Way to miss the forest for the trees.
Redistribution works by increasing the velocity of a given set of money. Sure too much can cause problems, and no not just that some people have more than other is not an issue. The problems only occur when demand is severely limited by too much wealth in the hands of too few.
The investments of the rich are not idle, but they do not magically lead to more jobs when they have more capital. Only demand can cause hiring. A lack of supply can restrict it, but that is not where we are right now. At this moment in time investments have low returns, I have money that could be invested sitting as cash (actual paper money, not in a bank) since the returns are just not worth it. From the economists point of view that is pretty bad, giving it to someone poorer would be one way to create some demand. Doing that would mean more opportunities to invest in companies that meet that new demand.
We have stifled demand and this is the result. I am only looking at one historical solution.
A minimum income like Milton Friedman proposed would I believe be the ideal solution. People would still work, for the extra money to improve their situation, and we would prevent a total loss of demand. Also I would be willing to then take more risk with my money since I would not have to worry about ending up in the poor house.
I am in favor of some gun control, like all rational gun owners are. Some people should not be allowed to own guns, children, the insane, violent felons.
The lower being the gun was always a bad idea. It should be the action.
No, I am being serious.
When you cannot even have a conversation without spewing your ideology you have a problem and need help. It is not healthy to be so obsessed.
This is not an attack, this is one human trying to help another who is clearly suffering.
No one said harm free. Harm reduction is something you should learn about before criticizing.
Some things are not worth dealing with.
For instance there is no point in arguing with someone who claims the earth is flat. Nor is there a need to go talk to the bum on the corner screaming about the aliens.
No, those are very easy to produce.
The receiver is machined, not 3d printed. In all other firearms it is considered the firearm.
Sorry I am done now. You need to look into some psychiatric help.
Putting your ideology over the lives of actual people just proves your really do need help.
If you cannot afford such treatment let me know and I will try to assist.
No, ideology is something you choose to believe even when reality conflicts with that. Principles are often tenants of an ideology. I am only interested in what works for the most and reduces harm, I do not care about anything else. If that means crack should be legal, fine, if it means we need to pay taxes to buy needles for junkies to keep them from clogging up the ER, fine. Ideology is for children.
Go read a history book and you will find yourself very guilty of that.
So then make it the receiver.
That is the part that is considered the gun when dealing with bolt actions.
Colt should never have been allowed to serialize the lower. You can make a lower out of sheet metal by hand. They are trivial to construct via many methods other than 3d printing.
Layoff on the damn ideology, makes it hard to talk to you.
So then what stops welfare from turning into that?
We have lots of people who either cannot or will not save for retirement. Most fall into that latter category. Your solution will grow welfare into the same size that SS is now.
The average wage is simply not enough to raise a family and save for retirement.
So what?
A lower without an upper is useless. That means all they have to do is update the law. Making barrels is still a lot harder to do, same with actions. The law is outdated and should regulate the parts that are hardest to produce.
So then why is welfare ok but not SS?
Do you think welfare should be used for this purpose? That being the retirements of those without another option.
HAHAHAHAHAHA, you actually fucking believe that?
Look at the life of the average person before 1913 and get back to me.
We did not get a shorter work week until after 1913. Labor regulation did that, not any magical market.
Go visit puerto rico, pay close attention to all the homeless and those who serve you the drinks with the umbrellas in them. Ask them how they are saving for their retirement.
All the economic freedom in the world does not mean shit when you have no money.
Stop with the ideology.
If we stop SS payments right now, people will be forced onto the street. That is a fact, unless you have some alterative for paying their bills.
For the most of human existence retirement did not exist. People worked until they died. That was it. There is no need to save for retirement when you die in the fields at 50 or in the mine at 45.
There exists a huge class of workers who literally could save every dime they don't spend on necessities and still not have enough to retire ever.
Even if you think they should try harder, or pull on their boot straps more or whatever fantasy you have, the reality is some people will never be able to save that kind of money. They just do not have the income to do so.
Without SS their will be old people begging in the streets. The simple fact is either through their own mistakes or by unfortunate circumstances many people will never have enough money to retire. When they can no longer work either we can help them or allow them to starve on the street. No amount of your ideology will change reality.
The free market does not raise all boats equally, that is a myth. Again, look at history not ideology.