"I'm just miffed that the only block of people on the planet arguing that there is no problem appear to be American. The EU has already issued warnings and the UK in particular has been engaged on sorting the Co2 output for _ten years_."
Europe also spends half it income at the European level on farm subsidies ( for the great unwashed: taxing 96% of the population to pay money to the other 4%). go figure.
"The idea that we should always be "balanced" when it comes to arguments of political import leads to a lot of bullshit getting consideration it doesn't deserve. Global warming deniers at this point are in the same class as creationists, Holocaust-deniers, and flat-earthers"
.....oh, dearie me, and I always thought I was a balanced person. Now I am put into the same corner as (sigh) holocaust deniers. let me recap: there is at least one person (me) thinking that at the basis of science there is at least a modicum of methods, like Occam's razor,. Now, the raw data are before our very eyes, and I do not dispute them; but, dear Sir, I dispute their extrapolations in the future, on the grounds that all these so called models do not explain great climate changes of the past, like the maunders minimum and the other variations of temperature in historical times in which the Impact of human activity was, by today's standards, negligible. Now, I can understand the primeval impulse of Man, in the face of things that hurt him and that he doesn't comprehend, to atone and offer sacrifices; after all, we are but a few generations removed from ancestors that made human sacrifices to appease the weather.I do not understand the same behaviour in people that follow a scientific site, in which the ability to deliver balanced reasoning and correct behaviour is defined as "Kharma".
So who is wrong, or lying: the person who says that today's model are inadequate and require further study, or the person that in the face of exogenous events says:"It is all my fault" and self mutilates, in an unselfish sacrifice to blind and deaf Gods?
As I said, further study is worthwhile. But remember, in science, it is the true scientist that tries to prove himself wrong. No opposition is required.
"If you take a look at the democracies of Europe however, people are far more engaged in politics and the turnouts during elections are on average far higher than the US or UK. That's because their voice can be heard, every vote counts..."
Really, what's the point you want to make? defining "care about politics and social entrepeneurship" as walking up to a booth and tossing a piece of paper in seems to me really a flight into the unknown. I can really only talk about Italy, my home country, but I must say that:
1. Voting was compulsory up until a few Years ago: if you did not vote, for example, you were not eligible for a job in the public sector. social inertia carried the 90+% participation on for some years after it was repealed, now it is slowly going down;
2.These proportional representation gave birth to many "pressure groups", political parties that were in reality Lobbies writ large, and that were (and are) clueless in most other aspects of managing a country or municipality, outside their narrow scope of interest, in which anyway thay grind their own axe, and do not try to do the best for the majority of citizens (after all, that's not their political base).
Political elections are, in an inescapable way, a great Leveler of opinions;the good of the majority can be bad in the eyes of the minority, and always, always, compromises have to be struck. Now, i find it interesting that in my countries there are fewer self help organizations, charities and the like, and with fewer volunteers, than in the US. People may yearn to have their pet issue represented in Parliament, but when I try to get them to donate blood they start to act distinctively queasy.
"Despite Intels problems, they made a record revenue and profit report this year. They still know how to make money and some reports says that their yields are far better than others and this may be a sign of this."
That's not how financial markets value companies, otherwise those who made the most money should have the highest Price/earning ratios and vice versa.
In reality, the stock market views company in a dynamic mode; is the company becoming moree productive, or less? does it depend on intellectual property or technological advancement? Is it strong in lucrative markets?
if you look at Intel versus AMD,, you'll see that AMD has done better. Now, AMD doesn't make the kind of money that intel does, but by getting out a products that's appealing for geeks folding like mad or *ahem* trying to be productive, they garnered more profit out of a unit of production than Intel. Remember that AMD outsell Intel in retail desktop,, and that's where a good part of the dough is.
....You know, I sold my semis stocks when I suddenly realized that I hadn't been pestering the Sysadmin for a new machine for my cubicle for a whole year.
"Could someone explain why the semiconductor industry is 'cyclical'? What is it which makes a downturn predictable, or is it a self-fulfilling thing (lack of investment during predicted downturns causes otherwise unnecessary lack of performance)?"
It is relatively simple: any new plant, or major refurbish of an existing plant, adds so much to capacity that demand takes a while to catch up. If demand grows even slightly less than forecast, Capacity utilization falls, and the company ends up running the plant for cash, i.e. pricing down the product to move inventory and recoup part of the building cost, making huge losses in the process.
This is particularly relevant at this point in time for Intel and AMD, since the forecast for Corporate computer demand have been way off the mark these three years. Why they were so high really escaped me at the time: for a generic office computer, any duron is really overkill, and corporations can refuse to install the latest and greatest MS operating system and go for more of what they have now.
there all all kind of impediments to Space flights, as a mean to go from A to B, cost being one. See HERE for a first try at speeding passengers across the pond. Space vertigo is another. See an interesting paper here.
"Of course, I could also be a cynic, considering Colton sold Live Software, he may be positioning his new venture for a buyout by Microsoft."
Best guess, that's the exit strategy. As Woody Allen wrote: " the Lions and the Lamb will lie together, but the Lamb will get very little sleep."
He may be working on versions for operating systems other than windows, but my guess is that these version will not see the light of day until Longhorn is available, for the simple reason that otherwise MS would morph the specs in longhorn. By NOT puttting out a MONO version, or a linux one,he practically buys a life insurance, and as long as he says he eventually will, MS buys Karma on the cheap. Remember, there is no Rule Book that says that to reach an agreement the parties involved have to meet, or talk to each other.
No, I do not think that's the "active" strategy there. I do think, tough, that they would go to great lenght to make sure that OEMs should offer only PCs with Windows installed; DRM hardware, anyone?
Considered together, XP and office go retail for about 450 bucks; true, big corporations pay much less, but I think that for all intent and purpose the MS guys get more than a hundred for every office PC licence sold. given that they want to go to a yearly fee business model, you're facing an annual bill in the region of 50 USD per PC licence. That's money to me. Anyway, it's not the money involved that makes these pilots important: it is the fact that all big corporations involved will be standing up for open file standards, like strict XML. That's the only way that the same pilot will be important five years from now.
More than that, it goes on to prove that in finance, as in other fields, the only yardstick a human being has to measure anything is himself. For the Japanese, buying a lot of real estate at the time was sensible, exactly for the same reason it was folly to US citizens; the value of the land encompassing the Imperial palace in Tokyo was assessed to value more than all the real estate in California, a thing that seen from now seems ludicrous enough.
......or was it ?
I was already a money manager at the time, and I think that it is time to say the sad truth: the Japanese were right. They were using their incredibly overpriced paper to buy reasonably priced assets. Sadly, they were over the top in debt, so they had to sell to get some cash back. We'd be marveling at their financial foresight otherwise.
In the case of coffee, I think the use of the word "addiction" is a severe misnomer. No one, not even someone with a severe case of geekyness, would drink a coupla mugs in the middle of one of the few nights he is not up surfing the 'net just because he is used to that, which would fit my definition of addiction.
"I would however demand compensation for the cost of a new launch and lost service and work on some kind of cooperation agreement so that I can deny service to agreed upon bad guys rather than just having my stuff shot down."
The US would gladly pay. In fact, whenever possible it would pay in advance.
Think, for example, about the US buying off all of IKONOS images of a country, to hide their movement from the enemy. Or, better yet but not very likely, "buying degradation" of the forthcoming Galileo positioning system.
Sadly, this system's rationale is only that it will be available in case of intentional degradation of the GPS signal, so these satellites are the most likey targets of any US "intervention".
Some people seems to be convinced it's better to ban everything questionable / politically incorrect instead of acknowgleding responsability as a parent and keeping your kids from seeing stuff you don't want them exposed to.
...Yeah, this generation wants to grow its children in a bubble with controlled atmosphere. I think it is wrong, but that's the trend.
" Being Christian and being left is perfectly possible, you don't have to be extreme left to call yourself left. "
Here in Italy,where the Pope sits, it is not only possible, it is in a way compulsory. nothing from the great liberal tradition sits well with the church higher ups.
Religions are per se incompatible, because their only really defining character is exclusivity; otherwise they would be called, as they often are, "phylosophies" and discarded as such. I still have to see a religious leader say: "...and if you also want to join the [insert your pet religious affiliation here], that's fine , no probs- we tolerate dual beliefs".
Make no mistake, I fully respect the right to exercise freedom of religion; but in my small, imperfect world the lack of tolerance is the most cardinal sin, the final impiety. especially because these atheist societies go to great pains to make freedom of religion available to anyone. They toe a line when someone tries to FORCE his belief on someone else.
you are fundamentally wrong. were you right, and were a majority like that, opinion movements like the one in question would be banned. The point is that they want a general ban, enforceable outside their circle. And, speaking as a parent of catholic upbringing, I am responsible and no one else for keeping my sons out of harm's way as long as they are at home, and for trying to make responsible adults out of them, because that's the endgame. Net Nanny setup FAQ, anyone?
Slashdot Mirror
"I'm just miffed that the only block of people on the planet arguing that there is no problem appear to be American. The EU has already issued warnings and the UK in particular has been engaged on sorting the Co2 output for _ten years_."
Europe also spends half it income at the European level on farm subsidies ( for the great unwashed: taxing 96% of the population to pay money to the other 4%). go figure.
"The idea that we should always be "balanced" when it comes to arguments of political import leads to a lot of bullshit getting consideration it doesn't deserve. Global warming deniers at this point are in the same class as creationists, Holocaust-deniers, and flat-earthers"
.
:"It is all my fault" and self mutilates, in an unselfish sacrifice to blind and deaf Gods?
.....oh, dearie me, and I always thought I was a balanced person. Now I am put into the same corner as (sigh) holocaust deniers.
let me recap: there is at least one person (me) thinking that at the basis of science there is at least a modicum of methods, like Occam's razor,
Now, the raw data are before our very eyes, and I do not dispute them; but, dear Sir, I dispute their extrapolations in the future, on the grounds that all these so called models do not explain great climate changes of the past, like the maunders minimum and the other variations of temperature in historical times in which the Impact of human activity was, by today's standards, negligible.
Now, I can understand the primeval impulse of Man, in the face of things that hurt him and that he doesn't comprehend, to atone and offer sacrifices; after all, we are but a few generations removed from ancestors that made human sacrifices to appease the weather.I do not understand the same behaviour in people that follow a scientific site, in which the ability to deliver balanced reasoning and correct behaviour is defined as "Kharma".
So who is wrong, or lying: the person who says that today's model are inadequate and require further study, or the person that in the face of exogenous events says
As I said, further study is worthwhile. But remember, in science, it is the true scientist that tries to prove himself wrong. No opposition is required.
"If you take a look at the democracies of Europe however, people are far more engaged in politics and the turnouts during elections are on average far higher than the US or UK. That's because their voice can be heard, every vote counts..."
Really, what's the point you want to make?
defining "care about politics and social entrepeneurship" as walking up to a booth and tossing a piece of paper in seems to me really a flight into the unknown. I can really only talk about Italy, my home country, but I must say that:
1. Voting was compulsory up until a few Years ago: if you did not vote, for example, you were not eligible for a job in the public sector. social inertia carried the 90+% participation on for some years after it was repealed, now it is slowly going down;
2.These proportional representation gave birth to many "pressure groups", political parties that were in reality Lobbies writ large, and that were (and are) clueless in most other aspects of managing a country or municipality, outside their narrow scope of interest, in which anyway thay grind their own axe, and do not try to do the best for the majority of citizens (after all, that's not their political base).
Political elections are, in an inescapable way, a great Leveler of opinions;the good of the majority can be bad in the eyes of the minority, and always, always, compromises have to be struck.
Now, i find it interesting that in my countries there are fewer self help organizations, charities and the like, and with fewer volunteers, than in the US. People may yearn to have their pet issue represented in Parliament, but when I try to get them to donate blood they start to act distinctively queasy.
"Despite Intels problems, they made a record revenue and profit report this year. They still know how to make money and some reports says that their yields are far better than others and this may be a sign of this."
That's not how financial markets value companies, otherwise those who made the most money should have the highest Price/earning ratios and vice versa.
In reality, the stock market views company in a dynamic mode; is the company becoming moree productive, or less? does it depend on intellectual property or technological advancement? Is it strong in lucrative markets?
if you look at Intel versus AMD,, you'll see that AMD has done better. Now, AMD doesn't make the kind of money that intel does, but by getting out a products that's appealing for geeks folding like mad or *ahem* trying to be productive, they garnered more profit out of a unit of production than Intel.
Remember that AMD outsell Intel in retail desktop,, and that's where a good part of the dough is.
....You know, I sold my semis stocks when I suddenly realized that I hadn't been pestering the Sysadmin for a new machine for my cubicle for a whole year.
"Could someone explain why the semiconductor industry is 'cyclical'? What is it which makes a downturn predictable, or is it a self-fulfilling thing (lack of investment during predicted downturns causes otherwise unnecessary lack of performance)?"
It is relatively simple: any new plant, or major refurbish of an existing plant, adds so much to capacity that demand takes a while to catch up.
If demand grows even slightly less than forecast, Capacity utilization falls, and the company ends up running the plant for cash, i.e. pricing down the product to move inventory and recoup part of the building cost, making huge losses in the process.
This is particularly relevant at this point in time for Intel and AMD, since the forecast for Corporate computer demand have been way off the mark these three years.
Why they were so high really escaped me at the time: for a generic office computer, any duron is really overkill, and corporations can refuse to install the latest and greatest MS operating system and go for more of what they have now.
........I just wonder what sharks and lasers have to do with it. Throw me a bone here!
" The next phase is likely going to be a private satellite launch system. "
....Hmmmm, I think someone thought that up already.
there all all kind of impediments to Space flights, as a mean to go from A to B, cost being one.
See HERE for a first try at speeding passengers across the pond.
Space vertigo is another. See an interesting paper here.
"It's different because no one's threatening to kill RNC delegate, you partisan asshole. "
........Yet.
"Of course, I could also be a cynic, considering Colton sold Live Software, he may be positioning his new venture for a buyout by Microsoft."
Best guess, that's the exit strategy. As Woody Allen wrote: " the Lions and the Lamb will lie together, but the Lamb will get very little sleep."
He may be working on versions for operating systems other than windows, but my guess is that these version will not see the light of day until Longhorn is available, for the simple reason that otherwise MS would morph the specs in longhorn.
By NOT puttting out a MONO version, or a linux one,he practically buys a life insurance, and as long as he says he eventually will, MS buys Karma on the cheap. Remember, there is no Rule Book that says that to reach an agreement the parties involved have to meet, or talk to each other.
Dot-Slashoters? Sounds like some funky teenage slang for drugs.
No, it is an accidental post from the "pentagon studies antimatter weapon" story yesterday;-)
No, I do not think that's the "active" strategy there.
I do think, tough, that they would go to great lenght to make sure that OEMs should offer only PCs with Windows installed; DRM hardware, anyone?
yeah, the only common agenda should be that both should root for open file standards.
"Excuse me, but what are the advantages that Linux has over Windows on the user desktop space?
This, for one, and this.
Considered together, XP and office go retail for about 450 bucks; true, big corporations pay much less, but I think that for all intent and purpose the MS guys get more than a hundred for every office PC licence sold.
given that they want to go to a yearly fee business model, you're facing an annual bill in the region of 50 USD per PC licence. That's money to me.
Anyway, it's not the money involved that makes these pilots important: it is the fact that all big corporations involved will be standing up for open file standards, like strict XML.
That's the only way that the same pilot will be important five years from now.
More than that, it goes on to prove that in finance, as in other fields, the only yardstick a human being has to measure anything is himself.
For the Japanese, buying a lot of real estate at the time was sensible, exactly for the same reason it was folly to US citizens; the value of the land encompassing the Imperial palace in Tokyo was assessed to value more than all the real estate in California, a thing that seen from now seems ludicrous enough.
......or was it ?
I was already a money manager at the time, and I think that it is time to say the sad truth: the Japanese were right. They were using their incredibly overpriced paper to buy reasonably priced assets. Sadly, they were over the top in debt, so they had to sell to get some cash back. We'd be marveling at their financial foresight otherwise.
.....will my tinfoil hat still work?
In the case of coffee, I think the use of the word "addiction" is a severe misnomer. No one, not even someone with a severe case of geekyness, would drink a coupla mugs in the middle of one of the few nights he is not up surfing the 'net just because he is used to that, which would fit my definition of addiction.
"I would however demand compensation for the cost of a new launch and lost service and work on some kind of cooperation agreement so that I can deny service to agreed upon bad guys rather than just having my stuff shot down."
.
The US would gladly pay. In fact, whenever possible it would pay in advance.
Think, for example, about the US buying off all of IKONOS images of a country, to hide their movement from the enemy. Or, better yet but not very likely, "buying degradation" of the forthcoming Galileo positioning system
Sadly, this system's rationale is only that it will be available in case of intentional degradation of the GPS signal, so these satellites are the most likey targets of any US "intervention".
Some people seems to be convinced it's better to ban everything questionable / politically incorrect instead of acknowgleding responsability as a parent and keeping your kids from seeing stuff you don't want them exposed to.
...Yeah, this generation wants to grow its children in a bubble with controlled atmosphere. I think it is wrong, but that's the trend.
" Being Christian and being left is perfectly possible, you don't have to be extreme left to call yourself left. "
,where the Pope sits, it is not only possible, it is in a way compulsory. nothing from the great liberal tradition sits well with the church higher ups.
Here in Italy
....funny that the church itself opposes distributing condoms to the general population there as a mean of stopping AIDS....
Religions are per se incompatible, because their only really defining character is exclusivity; otherwise they would be called, as they often are, "phylosophies" and discarded as such.
I still have to see a religious leader say: "...and if you also want to join the [insert your pet religious affiliation here], that's fine , no probs- we tolerate dual beliefs".
Make no mistake, I fully respect the right to exercise freedom of religion; but in my small, imperfect world the lack of tolerance is the most cardinal sin, the final impiety. especially because these atheist societies go to great pains to make freedom of religion available to anyone. They toe a line when someone tries to FORCE his belief on someone else.
you are fundamentally wrong.
were you right, and were a majority like that, opinion movements like the one in question would be banned. The point is that they want a general ban, enforceable outside their circle. And, speaking as a parent of catholic upbringing, I am responsible and no one else for keeping my sons out of harm's way as long as they are at home, and for trying to make responsible adults out of them, because that's the endgame.
Net Nanny setup FAQ, anyone?
Buddy, the people I don not want to lose time with do not know what coherent light is. they think that laser pointers are basically newfangled lamps.