...my family's Lorenz rifled musket [was] designed for military use. In fact, [it's] more powerful than an AR-15 (.54 caliber). The only difference is, these guns don't look "scary"; wood furniture instead of plastic, no pistol grip... This is all a knee-jerk reaction based solely upon looks, not capability.
Poor argument. Okay,.54 caliber may be considered "more powerful." However, I don't see killing 27 people with a muzzle-loader. Even the most chicken-shit would rush the guy while he reloaded.
Why are you using Monday pre-Market as your point? Cherry-picking, that's why. Why wouldn't you use today's value? Cherry-picking, that's why. You ignore their revenues; companies with those kinds of revenues and profits don't go into the dust bin. Yes, the stock is down, and anyone who was fool enough to buy at $700 deserves such - it was overvalued by a lot. Apple is not a niche player, your fandroid fantasy notwithstanding.
First, it's not 200 points. Second, that's off from a single-day all-time high - that's called cherry-picking your data. Third, Apple's sales are still through the roof and they are raking in 52% of the profits from smartphones (from YOUR linked article). Marketshare is marginally down in the THIRD QUARTER (pre-iPhone 5 sales). That doesn't sound like dustbin material. You are cherry-picking and wishfully thinking.
When this scenario plays out, I will gladly walk into and out of every store if I can expect a 10% off coupon for doing so.
Do you really think you're saving any money in the long run? When people get such discounts, the base price of everything goes up - after all, ultimately the manufacturer or seller isn't picking up the tab, the consumers are. So it's a temporary advantage, offset both by the higher prices other buyers pay as a result of YOUR discount, and by the higher prices YOU pay when you buy something that you don't get a discount on, but other buyers do. To paraphrase Syndrome in the Incredibles, "When everyone gets a discount, then no one does". Also, via Heinlein, "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
The whole thing is a zero-sum game, except for the manufacturers and sellers - they get their fingers on our privacy and entranceways into our lives, and we, ultimately, get nothing in return.
Actually, 10% is something of what I call "the standard discount." If you aren't getting it, you're essentially paying extra. There is always somebody who can get this discount (veterans, seniors, frequent buyers, whatever). With this system in place, I will get "the standard discount." If the general public is too dumb to get it, then I am not paying the extra.
A sale with a 10% discount is not the same as a sale with not discount. If they have to choose between selling you something with a discount or not selling it at all they'll be happy to give you the discount, however giving a discount to something who have bought the product anyway is just bad business.
Yeah, except when they cross-reference your income tax records (what, is that illegal, oh nooo...might have to pay a million dollar fine to make tens of millions in profit) and find out that you're not one of their target customers anyway and you don't get the offer.
But they didn't lose, they were just given 4 more years of control of one house of congress, a mandate by the people to prove how bad obama is for america!
Or, at least that's what this memo i have says...
Nit pick - the House has elections every two years. Hence the phrase "mid-term" (mid-Presidency) elections.
Why does that matter? It means more US workers will have jobs, and foxconn will still have to pay US taxes for the work done here. Still a win all around.
They also own Green & Blacks, who produce some very nice everyday chocolate. Their milk starts at 34% cocoa solids, and they do bars all the way up to 70% and 80%.
Why would you think that? The incoming Congress could simply add a single sentence to any bill stating that it repeals this one. Bam, moratorium over.
That was not my point. The OP said the 2 year limit meant it applied to the current Congress. My point is that the current Congress = Lameduck != incoming 2 year Congress.
Is that actually true? In the UK, Parliament can't pass laws that bind a future Parliament[1], but in this case he's only proposing a 2-year limit (i.e. for the duration of this Congress), so that wouldn't apply: they'd be voting to limit themselves, not future holders of their office.
No. If passed by the Lameduck Congress, it would bind the incoming Congress for two years.
One of the worst pieces of crapware I've ever encountered, with regards to hijacking functionality, trampling user-defined preferences, insinuating itself into unrelated software, hogging resources, being uncooperative with attempts to uninstall, and just generally causing anguish and frustration is QuickTime. Last I checked, that's an Apple product and a Mac staple.
But of course! Apple wanted their Windows software to fit into the ecosystem properly.
The biggest problem too is developing countries where 1st world countries have little to no authority. Who's going to go into India and replace all the mufflers for 1b people driving shitty 80s cars that the EPA would have a field day over. Better yet China, who probably don't believe in global warming and are only looking to compete with the states on production. I don't think 1st world countries play as much of a role in global warming as they used to. Then again I hear the air in L.A. still isn't so good either...
The USA is the biggest greenhouse gas emitter per capita.
Discussing climate change with the Ameritards is akin to attempting to explain to them why a 4% foreclosure rate in their country wasn't responsible for the global economic meltdown --- it was the banksters' ultra-leveraged bankster run which did it...
Please don't blame all of us for a few loud-mouthed asshats.
You must mean that that MANKIND-INDUCED event called the Dust Bowl. You see, people removed all the natural flora (grasses) and replaced it with deep-plowing agriculture without bothering with things like crop rotation, soil terracing, or trees for wind breaks.
Not really. There's "expert bias" which means experts tend to get the predictions wrong more often than the man in the street, as the man in the street usually knows he doesn't know. This pattern was empirically demonstrated by the Institute for Forecasting.
How convenient! Now your own opinions are obviously the best.
Slashdot Mirror
...my family's Lorenz rifled musket [was] designed for military use. In fact, [it's] more powerful than an AR-15 (.54 caliber). The only difference is, these guns don't look "scary"; wood furniture instead of plastic, no pistol grip ... This is all a knee-jerk reaction based solely upon looks, not capability.
Poor argument. Okay, .54 caliber may be considered "more powerful." However, I don't see killing 27 people with a muzzle-loader. Even the most chicken-shit would rush the guy while he reloaded.
Does this look like a niche player? http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAAPL&fstype=ii&ei=4W7SUMCiM6ut0AGYiQE
Why are you using Monday pre-Market as your point? Cherry-picking, that's why. Why wouldn't you use today's value? Cherry-picking, that's why. You ignore their revenues; companies with those kinds of revenues and profits don't go into the dust bin. Yes, the stock is down, and anyone who was fool enough to buy at $700 deserves such - it was overvalued by a lot. Apple is not a niche player, your fandroid fantasy notwithstanding.
First, it's not 200 points. Second, that's off from a single-day all-time high - that's called cherry-picking your data. Third, Apple's sales are still through the roof and they are raking in 52% of the profits from smartphones (from YOUR linked article). Marketshare is marginally down in the THIRD QUARTER (pre-iPhone 5 sales). That doesn't sound like dustbin material. You are cherry-picking and wishfully thinking.
More likely they think it's a waste of money. Apple stock is starting it's inevitable fall to reality and their margins are reverting to the mean.
Soon enough the iPhone will be remembered as the the product that followed the Blackberry into the dustbin of history.
Yeah, keep up that fandroid hate-fantasy of yours. You sound like the Romney supporters did before the election.
When this scenario plays out, I will gladly walk into and out of every store if I can expect a 10% off coupon for doing so.
Do you really think you're saving any money in the long run? When people get such discounts, the base price of everything goes up - after all, ultimately the manufacturer or seller isn't picking up the tab, the consumers are. So it's a temporary advantage, offset both by the higher prices other buyers pay as a result of YOUR discount, and by the higher prices YOU pay when you buy something that you don't get a discount on, but other buyers do. To paraphrase Syndrome in the Incredibles, "When everyone gets a discount, then no one does". Also, via Heinlein, "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
The whole thing is a zero-sum game, except for the manufacturers and sellers - they get their fingers on our privacy and entranceways into our lives, and we, ultimately, get nothing in return.
Actually, 10% is something of what I call "the standard discount." If you aren't getting it, you're essentially paying extra. There is always somebody who can get this discount (veterans, seniors, frequent buyers, whatever). With this system in place, I will get "the standard discount." If the general public is too dumb to get it, then I am not paying the extra.
A sale is a sale. Who cares who buys?
A sale with a 10% discount is not the same as a sale with not discount. If they have to choose between selling you something with a discount or not selling it at all they'll be happy to give you the discount, however giving a discount to something who have bought the product anyway is just bad business.
No kidding. But that was not the point of the OP.
Yeah, except when they cross-reference your income tax records (what, is that illegal, oh nooo...might have to pay a million dollar fine to make tens of millions in profit) and find out that you're not one of their target customers anyway and you don't get the offer.
Idiotic. A sale is a sale. Who cares who buys?
When this scenario plays out, I will gladly walk into and out of every store if I can expect a 10% off coupon for doing so.
Fuck that noise! If the company policy is encouraging me to come in when I'm sick, I'm going to lick every goddamn doorknob in the building!
Genius. Unfortunately, licking doorknobs is probably one way to stay sick.
But they didn't lose, they were just given 4 more years of control of one house of congress, a mandate by the people to prove how bad obama is for america!
Or, at least that's what this memo i have says...
Nit pick - the House has elections every two years. Hence the phrase "mid-term" (mid-Presidency) elections.
No shit. But you can't get the slobbering teabaggers to understand that.
Why does that matter? It means more US workers will have jobs, and foxconn will still have to pay US taxes for the work done here. Still a win all around.
It's never a win in the eyes of a hater.
The article is purportedly about Android. However, nearly all posts here have taken the troll-bait and posted a response to the opening phrase.
Please stop confusing the Apple haters with facts. The summary was designed specifically to troll them and it worked.
They also own Green & Blacks, who produce some very nice everyday chocolate. Their milk starts at 34% cocoa solids, and they do bars all the way up to 70% and 80%.
Everyday chocolate. Now that's what I call life.
No, it all started when a manager needed a patsy to take the blame for all the Goatse images in his browser cache.
Why would you think that? The incoming Congress could simply add a single sentence to any bill stating that it repeals this one. Bam, moratorium over.
That was not my point. The OP said the 2 year limit meant it applied to the current Congress. My point is that the current Congress = Lameduck != incoming 2 year Congress.
Is that actually true? In the UK, Parliament can't pass laws that bind a future Parliament[1], but in this case he's only proposing a 2-year limit (i.e. for the duration of this Congress), so that wouldn't apply: they'd be voting to limit themselves, not future holders of their office.
No. If passed by the Lameduck Congress, it would bind the incoming Congress for two years.
One of the worst pieces of crapware I've ever encountered, with regards to hijacking functionality, trampling user-defined preferences, insinuating itself into unrelated software, hogging resources, being uncooperative with attempts to uninstall, and just generally causing anguish and frustration is QuickTime. Last I checked, that's an Apple product and a Mac staple.
But of course! Apple wanted their Windows software to fit into the ecosystem properly.
The biggest problem too is developing countries where 1st world countries have little to no authority. Who's going to go into India and replace all the mufflers for 1b people driving shitty 80s cars that the EPA would have a field day over. Better yet China, who probably don't believe in global warming and are only looking to compete with the states on production. I don't think 1st world countries play as much of a role in global warming as they used to. Then again I hear the air in L.A. still isn't so good either...
The USA is the biggest greenhouse gas emitter per capita.
Discussing climate change with the Ameritards is akin to attempting to explain to them why a 4% foreclosure rate in their country wasn't responsible for the global economic meltdown --- it was the banksters' ultra-leveraged bankster run which did it...
Please don't blame all of us for a few loud-mouthed asshats.
You must mean that that MANKIND-INDUCED event called the Dust Bowl. You see, people removed all the natural flora (grasses) and replaced it with deep-plowing agriculture without bothering with things like crop rotation, soil terracing, or trees for wind breaks.
Not really. There's "expert bias" which means experts tend to get the predictions wrong more often than the man in the street, as the man in the street usually knows he doesn't know. This pattern was empirically demonstrated by the Institute for Forecasting.
How convenient! Now your own opinions are obviously the best.
Believe it or not, they don't rent porn. Almost worth it still for me to go there from Beaverton...
I guess you can get all the porn you want in Beaverton.