Well you are doing either yourself of them a disservice and its going to bite one of you one day. What happens when that person has some critical business on that and something goes wrong while you are on vacation? Nobody else knows how to help them; they wind up embarrassed in front of client? What happens when some sort of upgrade or change is made by another group within IT, that breaks it. Its not like it was on any test plan or documented so that is very likely in most shops I have worked in, you coworkers don't know about it and won't therefore think about it.
IPhone aside its not exactly easy for IT to be *helpful* because with all due respect you are usually as ignorant about what has to happen for your phone to send and receive mail as we are about the production planning, currency trading, contract management, or whatever it is you do.
You say, how do set up mail on my [A-z]*[0-9]?.?\? I ask well does it use IMAP, POP, what authentication methods for SMTP does it support and can TLS for any of those? You usually answer with a blank stare, and suggest we could look at the manual after a few moments. Next we have to make services available and run gateways our *supported* might not need.
So what it often comes down to is you are really asking IT to figure it out and make it work. There often is no middle ground. Mix security considerations in and that tiny middle ground gets even smaller. Can the storage on your device by encrypted? Was it when you lost it; because you have customer information in some of those e-mails you reading there. Do you even inform me if you lose it? See I might need to be able show some supporting evidence to avoid disclosure requirements but your device does not report compliance information to me, so now what?
If you don't think you need a firewall on your boarder and you don't have one any way you are doing it wrong. Defense in depth is the only thing that works, think about security at every layer.
As others have said PA-RISC has been discontinued for some time, so that is one reason. The other is I am pretty certain this thing is targeted at the Linux and [A-z]*.?BSD ecosystem, which has pretty strong support for ARM these days. The software stack for PA-RISC is just not there unless you want to run HPUX and the market for new HPUX deployments is probably quite small.
80GBps switch or not you not probably running your database on these things, but they sound like a perfect web farm in box solution. The software stack on the Linux and [A-z]*.?BSD is entirely there for that and is largely familiar to existing admins. Apache on Linux is still Apache on Linux even when ARCH=arm5tel
You really are drinking the Kool-Aide, Look *IF* it was the GOPs fault then Reid would have put the Jobs bill to the senate floor, let it fail in the House. The House has a wide GOP margin, the Senate has a narrow DNC margin. If this was about making the GOP look like obstructionists its a no brainier, let them filibuster in the senate in front of the news cameras or vote it down in the House. That way fault would fall clearly on their shoulders.
There are two reasonable conclusions you draw, one or both may be true:
1) There is little actual DNC support for the bill and they don't want look like there is in fighting between them and the President.
2) Obama recognizes his plan will be failure and the whole thing is just a smoke screen; Reid is complicit and thinks the GOP will be assigned the blame primary rather than congress in general.
This is great, thanks Mr.President for this amazing simplification of the political process. In the past I would have had figure out who my Senator is and write to his office to get a condescending BS laden response, on why its so important we preserve the status quo.
Now all I have to do is post on one easy to remember website and if enough people also want to hear why a certain campaign donator needs to have their economic rent protected the White House will kindly oblige.
If, for example, you had to get a bill passed every time you wanted to figure out whether a new mining technique was a good idea, it would make the technological development of the field much slower, and fetter the market even more than unelected bureaucrats do.
That's the trouble with what has happened to this nation right there. Trying a new mining technique should not require an act of government!
If you own the land, and can find people to work the mine that should be that. If you harm someone else property near by well they file a civil suit against you. If it turns out to be a big issue that come up repeatedly then and only then should congress take an interest in it.
I agree and have posted before as well. Omnibus bills are essentially undemocratic. It lets a few privileged legislators who by no virtue other than having been there long enough to get committee appointments, silently slip cronyism into legislation the public won't notice until its much to late.
Legislation should be atomic, and stated as succinctly as possible. We should amend the Constitution to require that all items touched upon in a legislative act be clearly and directly related in a way understandable by a common citizen. That way an act could be struck down by a court if the DOJ cannot convince a judge, that say a farm subsidies for soybeans are not directly related to highway funding; the highway bill could get challenged and stuck down.
There is a big difference between a student loan and your home loan. Your home loan is secured by your home. If you don't pay the bank gets the asset. The bank is taking a risk, in exchange they get interest. The risk is the assumption that you can pay OR the asset will be worth at least their principle after they recover and sell it. Its all arms length everyone participating in the deal is doing so entirely freely. If the situation become unfavorable to either party its a financial contract, the consequences of breaking it are spelled out in the contract, there is no moral right or wrong in either side defaulting on their contractual obligation.
The student loan on the other hand is entirely based on your promise to pay. Its unsecured. There is nothing for the lender to recover if you don't pay, oh wait that is not quite true. If it were true student loans at least one without collateral put up or cosigners included, would be the same 12-25pct interest rate credit cards charge because the risk would be so great. They are instead secured by the government, making all of you fellow citizens unwilling participants if you decide not pay. What you have here is now a social contract, and yes you are morally obligated to make good.
Once again wrong, Unions exist because of government. They enjoy all sorts of special legal protections. I don't unions or union membership should be restricted. Its a basic constitutional right to assemble and associate after all.
What is BS is that unions can make it practically impossible for management to hire non-union workers or for workers who want to remain employed but wish to leave the union to do so. Take away the legal protections that make those things possible, which are government granted, and I'll support unions. If management is really abusive then employees will want to be part of a union and want the protection it offers. If there are people willing to work for the compensation management is offering in the conditions prevailing and union is in the way, then just being collusive a-holes IMHO.
Home come when Oil companies collude to keep prices high there is mass outrage on the left, but when labor colludes keep wages, their just "organizing". It should cut both ways. Make it a "RIGHT-TO-WORK" nation and I will take no issue with unions, till then they just economic cheaters.
Yes but with any other loan, you can declare bankruptcy and take a hit in your credit for years, but be forgiven the debt. Why should this debt be any different from those?
True but with those other loans they not being garanteed by the federal government and not therefore being backed by your fellow citizens tax dollars, but solely by an investor who chose to take a risk on you.
When you borrow from a bank to buy a house, are you not borrowing from someone successful? If you bankrupt and don't pay them, are you somehow not making a successful person pay what should be your burden?
No a home loan is a collateralized loan, if you don't pay the bank gets the asset, your house to sell. That is why they have it appraised before the give you the loan, the have to make sure its worth at least as much as they are lending in case you don't pay. Now granted the market may deteriorate but that is the risk they accept in exchange for the probably return.
Are you then suggesting that it should be impossible to declare bankruptcy at all? Should people be slaves to their debt their entire lives? What if someone dies and still owes, which successful person should be punished for their death and failure to repay -- their family or the banker?
Nobody is suggesting that, I would suggest the government should not be granting loan guarantees with tax dollars. Because they do *most* student loans represent a special class of debt where the public rather then the lender has assumed the risk. So as long as you are alive I do think the obligation should remain with you; after all you will continue to benefit from the education. Now should the amount of money taken from you each period be crippling, no because that actually reduces your long term ability to make good.
Student loans are unsecured. With a home, car, business or other type of loan usually there is some asset the lender can claim and its also usually the case the lender is taking the risk. Consider the rates on your typical credit card, ever ask yourself why they are higher than the rate on your mortgage? Because there is most like no assets the creditor can recover if you don't pay. The risk is much greater so the reward must be much higher!
When you are willing to pay 18% interest on your student loan to a private lender, then you can have the freedom to default, at the cost of a black mark on your personal credit. As long as *I* am effectively on the hook for your failure to pay and *I* am not being given a choice to pay less in taxes, if I don't support Sally Mae then no you don't get to default.
Government got involved with healthcare in the late 40's when they made medical benefits a tax haven, for both the employer and the employee. Suddenly there was a huge tax incentive (and it IS huge in dollar terms) to make part of your compensation a medical benefit rather than all wages. Leaving you to go purchase your own insurance and/or medical services.
Even today medical insurance costs very little, unless you already have a condition. Go price out a high deductible plan without preventative care on the individual market. Unless you have a terrible risk profile I expect you will discover its CHEAP. That is actual insurance though its only for the unexpected severe events. The thing is employers almost never offer insurance, because its would not represent much in the way of compensation.
Instead the offer medical coverage of some sort. Which creates an incentive for you to go consume more medical services and products. Why? Well because from your perspective you have already paid for them. So because its not coming directly out of your pocket you go see the doctor for some things ordinarily you would not.
Now the medical industry has a huge supply of customers who only very indirectly experience costs, therefor become price insensitive. That drives up both the costs and the quality of care. Trouble is as the quality of care goes up it reaches a point where the uncovered people are pretty much priced out of the market.
So the response is get everyone covered, which is going to be the most amazing EPIC FAIL EVER. If the government had price controls it might work, but the current hybrid private provider, private insurer, public subsidy system is going to drive costs into the stratosphere not lower them. I am VERY against a nationalized health care industry but the mixing private owner ship with socialized costs is going to result in the worst of both worlds.
I am gOing to guess you are either still in school or did not go to college. The gen Ed courses are the ones of real value and I never got that until after I graduated. I am very very lucky I had an attitude of as long as I have to do this, make the most of it while I was in those classes or I really would have missed out. The stuff in your program should be stuff you already know a little about, have some natural facility for and interest enough to learn largely on your own. Gen Ed gives you a foot in the door for the other disiPlines. It ensurese you know the vocabulary and where to find more information if you need it later. It gives you enough comfort to talk to people in those fields to ask questions. You will find if you are doing any real proffesssional level work you don't do it in a vacume and that you need to work with people of other disiplines.
The browser makers playing fast a lose with standards, outside of html sucks! They all suck, try an find a browser that does PASV ftp *correctly*. They all either as part of a very misguided security attempt or based on the assumption FTP servers are behind NAT and can't be configured to send a correct address in the PASV response don't use the address value returned and stupidly use control sockets remote address as the address.
That breaks all but the very most common use case and all the browsers do it. I have seen other examples of DNS FAIL out there as well.
For one thing, paying off the national debt would mean the end of Treasury bonds, a pillar of the global economy. Treasury securities are crucially important to the world financial system in a number of ways: banks buy them as low-risk assets
Lets be really honest here banks have been using these not as low risk but really as more like NO-risk assets, hell even Fanny/Freddie bonds which were not supposed to be backed proved to be backed. So for some reason we are offering banks a place to store wealth securely where the security is financed by the tax payer and generate returns paid in interest by the tax payer.
So what the government has really done is create a special class of people (bank owners) who get free money. In different times government borrowing made sense in not just the economic sense but in the basic justice sense as well. Today with a purely fiat currency, and zero change of government and even certain not government securities being defaulted upon (no risk) without it meaning an all bets are off and US currency is worthless anyway situation, we have what is basically institutionalized THEFT and nothing more.
There standards might be higher but the real issue is we object to the activity, not to its poor implementation. I don't want to have to get a pat down before I board a plane, if its done professionally or poorly is not really the issue.
The level of safety screening baggage affords is enough for me. I don't want someone to be able to take down a plane by throwing a box onto a conveyor; I'll pay for baggage screening in my ticket price. I am willing to accept, rather than try and control the risk someone is willing to commit suicide to take down a plan by boarding with their bomb, at least if the only available controls are as invasive as pat downs and naked pictures.
Federal baggage screens might be better than private, I doubt it but do some trials or cite some existing evidence and if solid I'll accept it. I don't need my right to be secure in my person completely trampled in the name of safety; no matter if its effective of not; thanks.
Shredded paper doesn't get recycled anyway. It's too small and annoying to deal with, they just throw it out at the recycling center.
Do you have evidence of that? I have toured some paper making facilities like Crane, who do use recycled materials and the first thing they do with paper or cloth is grind it to pulp.
I can't recall if I say any paper that looked like it'd be through a shredder going into the input hoppers but from what I saw their would be no trouble using such material. Employees were dumping stuff in by the sack full so I doubt the handling of such material would be significantly burdensome either.
Yes is about predicting values next week, when you short. Guess what When most investors long its about predicting future revenue for the most part. If applied commercial Fusion was suddenly a reality, what do think all the people holding stocks in big oil and guess would think about the future value of those companies? My guess is they would start to think gee all that land they have leased in the middle of nowhere because it has minerals under it, is suddenly worth less because th need for those minerals will be much less. They are going sell to their stocks to today and buy something else with bigger growth potential.
Processor : Feroceon 88FR131 rev 1 (v5l) BogoMIPS : 1192.75 Features : swp half thumb fastmult edsp CPU implementer : 0x56 CPU architecture: 5TE CPU variant : 0x2 CPU part : 0x131 CPU revision : 1
Slashdot Mirror
Well you are doing either yourself of them a disservice and its going to bite one of you one day. What happens when that person has some critical business on that and something goes wrong while you are on vacation? Nobody else knows how to help them; they wind up embarrassed in front of client? What happens when some sort of upgrade or change is made by another group within IT, that breaks it. Its not like it was on any test plan or documented so that is very likely in most shops I have worked in, you coworkers don't know about it and won't therefore think about it.
IPhone aside its not exactly easy for IT to be *helpful* because with all due respect you are usually as ignorant about what has to happen for your phone to send and receive mail as we are about the production planning, currency trading, contract management, or whatever it is you do.
You say, how do set up mail on my [A-z]*[0-9]?.?\? I ask well does it use IMAP, POP, what authentication methods for SMTP does it support and can TLS for any of those? You usually answer with a blank stare, and suggest we could look at the manual after a few moments. Next we have to make services available and run gateways our *supported* might not need.
So what it often comes down to is you are really asking IT to figure it out and make it work. There often is no middle ground. Mix security considerations in and that tiny middle ground gets even smaller. Can the storage on your device by encrypted? Was it when you lost it; because you have customer information in some of those e-mails you reading there. Do you even inform me if you lose it? See I might need to be able show some supporting evidence to avoid disclosure requirements but your device does not report compliance information to me, so now what?
If you don't think you need a firewall on your boarder and you don't have one any way you are doing it wrong. Defense in depth is the only thing that works, think about security at every layer.
As others have said PA-RISC has been discontinued for some time, so that is one reason. The other is I am pretty certain this thing is targeted at the Linux and [A-z]*.?BSD ecosystem, which has pretty strong support for ARM these days. The software stack for PA-RISC is just not there unless you want to run HPUX and the market for new HPUX deployments is probably quite small.
80GBps switch or not you not probably running your database on these things, but they sound like a perfect web farm in box solution. The software stack on the Linux and [A-z]*.?BSD is entirely there for that and is largely familiar to existing admins. Apache on Linux is still Apache on Linux even when ARCH=arm5tel
You really are drinking the Kool-Aide, Look *IF* it was the GOPs fault then Reid would have put the Jobs bill to the senate floor, let it fail in the House. The House has a wide GOP margin, the Senate has a narrow DNC margin. If this was about making the GOP look like obstructionists its a no brainier, let them filibuster in the senate in front of the news cameras or vote it down in the House. That way fault would fall clearly on their shoulders.
There are two reasonable conclusions you draw, one or both may be true:
1) There is little actual DNC support for the bill and they don't want look like there is in fighting between them and the President.
2) Obama recognizes his plan will be failure and the whole thing is just a smoke screen; Reid is complicit and thinks the GOP will be assigned the blame primary rather than congress in general.
This is great, thanks Mr.President for this amazing simplification of the political process. In the past I would have had figure out who my Senator is and write to his office to get a condescending BS laden response, on why its so important we preserve the status quo.
Now all I have to do is post on one easy to remember website and if enough people also want to hear why a certain campaign donator needs to have their economic rent protected the White House will kindly oblige.
If, for example, you had to get a bill passed every time you wanted to figure out whether a new mining technique was a good idea, it would make the technological development of the field much slower, and fetter the market even more than unelected bureaucrats do.
That's the trouble with what has happened to this nation right there. Trying a new mining technique should not require an act of government!
If you own the land, and can find people to work the mine that should be that. If you harm someone else property near by well they file a civil suit against you. If it turns out to be a big issue that come up repeatedly then and only then should congress take an interest in it.
I agree and have posted before as well. Omnibus bills are essentially undemocratic. It lets a few privileged legislators who by no virtue other than having been there long enough to get committee appointments, silently slip cronyism into legislation the public won't notice until its much to late.
Legislation should be atomic, and stated as succinctly as possible. We should amend the Constitution to require that all items touched upon in a legislative act be clearly and directly related in a way understandable by a common citizen. That way an act could be struck down by a court if the DOJ cannot convince a judge, that say a farm subsidies for soybeans are not directly related to highway funding; the highway bill could get challenged and stuck down.
There is a big difference between a student loan and your home loan. Your home loan is secured by your home. If you don't pay the bank gets the asset. The bank is taking a risk, in exchange they get interest. The risk is the assumption that you can pay OR the asset will be worth at least their principle after they recover and sell it. Its all arms length everyone participating in the deal is doing so entirely freely. If the situation become unfavorable to either party its a financial contract, the consequences of breaking it are spelled out in the contract, there is no moral right or wrong in either side defaulting on their contractual obligation.
The student loan on the other hand is entirely based on your promise to pay. Its unsecured. There is nothing for the lender to recover if you don't pay, oh wait that is not quite true. If it were true student loans at least one without collateral put up or cosigners included, would be the same 12-25pct interest rate credit cards charge because the risk would be so great. They are instead secured by the government, making all of you fellow citizens unwilling participants if you decide not pay. What you have here is now a social contract, and yes you are morally obligated to make good.
When I say smaller government, I mean less revenue, less spending, and lower page count if the US Code is printed.
In fact I don't know any small government advocate who thinks in terms of head count, or if they do only as a way to reduce spending.
Once again wrong, Unions exist because of government. They enjoy all sorts of special legal protections. I don't unions or union membership should be restricted. Its a basic constitutional right to assemble and associate after all.
What is BS is that unions can make it practically impossible for management to hire non-union workers or for workers who want to remain employed but wish to leave the union to do so. Take away the legal protections that make those things possible, which are government granted, and I'll support unions. If management is really abusive then employees will want to be part of a union and want the protection it offers. If there are people willing to work for the compensation management is offering in the conditions prevailing and union is in the way, then just being collusive a-holes IMHO.
Home come when Oil companies collude to keep prices high there is mass outrage on the left, but when labor colludes keep wages, their just "organizing". It should cut both ways. Make it a "RIGHT-TO-WORK" nation and I will take no issue with unions, till then they just economic cheaters.
Yes but with any other loan, you can declare bankruptcy and take a hit in your credit for years, but be forgiven the debt. Why should this debt be any different from those?
True but with those other loans they not being garanteed by the federal government and not therefore being backed by your fellow citizens tax dollars, but solely by an investor who chose to take a risk on you.
When you borrow from a bank to buy a house, are you not borrowing from someone successful? If you bankrupt and don't pay them, are you somehow not making a successful person pay what should be your burden?
No a home loan is a collateralized loan, if you don't pay the bank gets the asset, your house to sell. That is why they have it appraised before the give you the loan, the have to make sure its worth at least as much as they are lending in case you don't pay. Now granted the market may deteriorate but that is the risk they accept in exchange for the probably return.
Are you then suggesting that it should be impossible to declare bankruptcy at all? Should people be slaves to their debt their entire lives? What if someone dies and still owes, which successful person should be punished for their death and failure to repay -- their family or the banker?
Nobody is suggesting that, I would suggest the government should not be granting loan guarantees with tax dollars. Because they do *most* student loans represent a special class of debt where the public rather then the lender has assumed the risk. So as long as you are alive I do think the obligation should remain with you; after all you will continue to benefit from the education. Now should the amount of money taken from you each period be crippling, no because that actually reduces your long term ability to make good.
Student loans are unsecured. With a home, car, business or other type of loan usually there is some asset the lender can claim and its also usually the case the lender is taking the risk. Consider the rates on your typical credit card, ever ask yourself why they are higher than the rate on your mortgage? Because there is most like no assets the creditor can recover if you don't pay. The risk is much greater so the reward must be much higher!
When you are willing to pay 18% interest on your student loan to a private lender, then you can have the freedom to default, at the cost of a black mark on your personal credit. As long as *I* am effectively on the hook for your failure to pay and *I* am not being given a choice to pay less in taxes, if I don't support Sally Mae then no you don't get to default.
Government got involved with healthcare in the late 40's when they made medical benefits a tax haven, for both the employer and the employee. Suddenly there was a huge tax incentive (and it IS huge in dollar terms) to make part of your compensation a medical benefit rather than all wages. Leaving you to go purchase your own insurance and/or medical services.
Even today medical insurance costs very little, unless you already have a condition. Go price out a high deductible plan without preventative care on the individual market. Unless you have a terrible risk profile I expect you will discover its CHEAP. That is actual insurance though its only for the unexpected severe events. The thing is employers almost never offer insurance, because its would not represent much in the way of compensation.
Instead the offer medical coverage of some sort. Which creates an incentive for you to go consume more medical services and products. Why? Well because from your perspective you have already paid for them.
So because its not coming directly out of your pocket you go see the doctor for some things ordinarily you would not.
Now the medical industry has a huge supply of customers who only very indirectly experience costs, therefor become price insensitive. That drives up both the costs and the quality of care. Trouble is as the quality of care goes up it reaches a point where the uncovered people are pretty much priced out of the market.
So the response is get everyone covered, which is going to be the most amazing EPIC FAIL EVER. If the government had price controls it might work, but the current hybrid private provider, private insurer, public subsidy system is going to drive costs into the stratosphere not lower them. I am VERY against a nationalized health care industry but the mixing private owner ship with socialized costs is going to result in the worst of both worlds.
I am gOing to guess you are either still in school or did not go to college. The gen Ed courses are the ones of real value and I never got that until after I graduated. I am very very lucky I had an attitude of as long as I have to do this, make the most of it while I was in those classes or I really would have missed out. The stuff in your program should be stuff you already know a little about, have some natural facility for and interest enough to learn largely on your own. Gen Ed gives you a foot in the door for the other disiPlines. It ensurese you know the vocabulary and where to find more information if you need it later. It gives you enough comfort to talk to people in those fields to ask questions. You will find if you are doing any real proffesssional level work you don't do it in a vacume and that you need to work with people of other disiplines.
The browser makers playing fast a lose with standards, outside of html sucks! They all suck, try an find a browser that does PASV ftp *correctly*. They all either as part of a very misguided security attempt or based on the assumption FTP servers are behind NAT and can't be configured to send a correct address in the PASV response don't use the address value returned and stupidly use control sockets remote address as the address.
That breaks all but the very most common use case and all the browsers do it. I have seen other examples of DNS FAIL out there as well.
For one thing, paying off the national debt would mean the end of Treasury bonds, a pillar of the global economy. Treasury securities are crucially important to the world financial system in a number of ways: banks buy them as low-risk assets
Lets be really honest here banks have been using these not as low risk but really as more like NO-risk assets, hell even Fanny/Freddie bonds which were not supposed to be backed proved to be backed. So for some reason we are offering banks a place to store wealth securely where the security is financed by the tax payer and generate returns paid in interest by the tax payer.
So what the government has really done is create a special class of people (bank owners) who get free money. In different times government borrowing made sense in not just the economic sense but in the basic justice sense as well. Today with a purely fiat currency, and zero change of government and even certain not government securities being defaulted upon (no risk) without it meaning an all bets are off and US currency is worthless anyway situation, we have what is basically institutionalized THEFT and nothing more.
I pledge allegiance to the flag and to the republic for which it stands, one nation...
So yes he did pledge to the flag but also to the nation, if you are going to get technical on us do it correctly.
There standards might be higher but the real issue is we object to the activity, not to its poor implementation. I don't want to have to get a pat down before I board a plane, if its done professionally or poorly is not really the issue.
The level of safety screening baggage affords is enough for me. I don't want someone to be able to take down a plane by throwing a box onto a conveyor; I'll pay for baggage screening in my ticket price. I am willing to accept, rather than try and control the risk someone is willing to commit suicide to take down a plan by boarding with their bomb, at least if the only available controls are as invasive as pat downs and naked pictures.
Federal baggage screens might be better than private, I doubt it but do some trials or cite some existing evidence and if solid I'll accept it. I don't need my right to be secure in my person completely trampled in the name of safety; no matter if its effective of not; thanks.
Still think either of the two main parties in this nation are different from the Nazi's in way other than the groups they target?
Yea, its not like its the operating systems job to abstract the hardware, and coordinate resource sharing.
Shredded paper doesn't get recycled anyway. It's too small and annoying to deal with, they just throw it out at the recycling center.
Do you have evidence of that? I have toured some paper making facilities like Crane, who do use recycled materials and the first thing they do with paper or cloth is grind it to pulp.
I can't recall if I say any paper that looked like it'd be through a shredder going into the input hoppers but from what I saw their would be no trouble using such material. Employees were dumping stuff in by the sack full so I doubt the handling of such material would be significantly burdensome either.
Yes is about predicting values next week, when you short. Guess what When most investors long its about predicting future revenue for the most part. If applied commercial Fusion was suddenly a reality, what do think all the people holding stocks in big oil and guess would think about the future value of those companies? My guess is they would start to think gee all that land they have leased in the middle of nowhere because it has minerals under it, is suddenly worth less because th need for those minerals will be much less. They are going sell to their stocks to today and buy something else with bigger growth potential.
What will that do to prices today? exactly.
Processor : Feroceon 88FR131 rev 1 (v5l)
BogoMIPS : 1192.75
Features : swp half thumb fastmult edsp
CPU implementer : 0x56
CPU architecture: 5TE
CPU variant : 0x2
CPU part : 0x131
CPU revision : 1
Hardware : Marvell GuruPlug Reference Board
A Marvel kirkwood core @1.2Ghz, is about half as many bogomips as an intel Atom N280
take short positions in oil and gas?