I'm thankful for that. The failure mode of most mechanical problems with an average car is that it gently rolls to the side of the road. The failure mode of most mechanical problems with an average light aircraft is plummeting to death, and likely destroying something below you in the process.
Think of all the nitwits you see on the freeway, and then imagine them with hands on stick in a Cessna. No, thanks.
Burning wood is far better for the environment than burning coal or oil. Planting new trees will pull the carbon out of the air to make the tree grow, and trees replenish many orders of magnitude faster than coal or oil. It also doesn't release nearly the chemical filth that burning oil and coal does.
Wood may not be as energetic as oil or coal, but not exactly "bad."
It's because the electrons aren't actually allowed to pass over the border - they end up just getting agitated and wait in line. Like I do at the airport.
To US Energy Dept. estimated, in 2012, that there is ~12GW worth of power that could be tapped from existing, non-power-producing dams [energy.gov]. That's handily 10% more hydro than what we've got now.
It's more a problem that pretty much any river in the US that is suitable for a large hydro project, already has large hydro projects built in the 1930s through 1960s.
We weren't afraid of mega-dam projects in the past - look at some of the dams on the Columbia as proof, specifically the Grand Coulee Dam which holds back 9 km^3 of water and produces 6800 MW of power - over 3x what Hoover Dam puts out. And it's one of 14 dams on the Columbia.
There's a reason why we have both the words "renewable" and "sustainable" - they do not mean the same thing.
Costa Rica will get more rain, which will "renew" the reservoirs behind the hydro dams. It's not raining 100% of the time, and the hydro dams release more volume of water than the rain provides in the same unit time, so it's not completely sustainable. But it is still a renewable resource.
No, but then some government body has a list of people that were so concerned with government eavesdropping that they went out of their way to prevent it. Sounds like a target list for investigation / abuse of power to me.
Well, it would no longer be mobile except for the couple million gallons of water they hosed over the whole thing. I imagine that made some of it mobile in ways that people don't appreciate.
The problem being it's utter bollocks [google.com]. Anything that becomes molten will mix into the fuel and dilute it, lowering the reaction rate and moving you further and further away from a self-sustaining reaction.
That's not the only reason it's complete horseshit - once you actually get to the center of the planet, the melting whatever that magically never dilutes would be moving opposite of gravity.
Wait, are you saying that if you buy two devices from the same manufacturer, that they might work better together than two devices from wildly different vendors?
Apple clearly doesn't make a product that satisfies your requirements.
And you know what? That's perfectly fine. They don't need to. And you don't need them to. But the overwhelming vast majority of the market doesn't have the same requirements you do, and the products that Apple makes does meet their requirements.
I don't understand why Apple's products have to be everything to everyone - no other company is thought of this way. Do people get up in arms because BMW doesn't make heavy duty work trucks? Should people not buy Ford because they don't make motorcycles?
More than that, I want there to be at least two viable platforms out there. A healthy Android stack puts pressure on Apple to make iOS better. A healthy iOS stack puts pressure on Google to make Android better.
Who wins? We all do. I'd even like to see a better offering from Microsoft just to keep the other two honest. In a 3-way fight for my money, I'm the ultimate winner.
That's only the definition if you fail to think about it for 5 seconds.
Hint: there are different components in different phones, and different components have different costs. These costs are a component of the retail price.
Yes, there is a margin markup in the price because electronics companies are not charities. But the price difference between an android handset and an iPhone is not all margin.
Especially considering the complete lack of compelling competition out there. When the games everyone seems to be looking forward to are Modern Warfare Black Ops 19 and Battlefield 7, which are exactly the same as the last 6 versions, how can you not want to put something out that breaks the mold of "multiplayer first, story last" ?
You aren't EA - we're not worried that you're just milking the IP of the past because there is a completely creatively bankrupt organization paying the bills.
As with all things in the completely screwed US tax code, there are rules.
You get a $250k ($500k if married) exemption if it is your primary residence.
If it is a rental / investment property you will have to pay a graduated rate that depends on your other annual income: 15% if you make less than $200k/year ($250k/year if married); add on a 3.8% medicare surcharge if you're between that and $400k/year ($450k/year if married) making it 18.8% of profits. If you're over that, then it's 20% cap gains + 3.8% medicare for 23.8% of profits. BUT, if you had the place for less than a year, the profit is taxed at your normal income tax rate, plus the 3.8% if your income is within the range stated above.
This is part of why everyone would like real tax reform to come out of Congress.
It's called a "capital gains tax" and it already exists.
If you sell a house / stock issue / option and actually gain a profit on it from your cost basis to acquire that asset, you owe tax on that profit. 15% if you have less than $413k/year income, 20% if you're over that.
If you sell at a loss, you don't owe tax, but you're also realizing a monetary loss that you wouldn't have otherwise had if you held onto the asset.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm thankful for that. The failure mode of most mechanical problems with an average car is that it gently rolls to the side of the road. The failure mode of most mechanical problems with an average light aircraft is plummeting to death, and likely destroying something below you in the process.
Think of all the nitwits you see on the freeway, and then imagine them with hands on stick in a Cessna. No, thanks.
Burning wood is far better for the environment than burning coal or oil. Planting new trees will pull the carbon out of the air to make the tree grow, and trees replenish many orders of magnitude faster than coal or oil. It also doesn't release nearly the chemical filth that burning oil and coal does.
Wood may not be as energetic as oil or coal, but not exactly "bad."
It's because the electrons aren't actually allowed to pass over the border - they end up just getting agitated and wait in line. Like I do at the airport.
(Joke is meant for AC interties only.)
think Houston and it's suburbs.
Okay, I'm thinking about Houston and it's suburbs. Can we flood it and use it for power generation?
To US Energy Dept. estimated, in 2012, that there is ~12GW worth of power that could be tapped from existing, non-power-producing dams [energy.gov]. That's handily 10% more hydro than what we've got now.
10%? Check your math.
One dam on the Columbia puts out 6.8GW by itself.
It's more a problem that pretty much any river in the US that is suitable for a large hydro project, already has large hydro projects built in the 1930s through 1960s.
We weren't afraid of mega-dam projects in the past - look at some of the dams on the Columbia as proof, specifically the Grand Coulee Dam which holds back 9 km^3 of water and produces 6800 MW of power - over 3x what Hoover Dam puts out. And it's one of 14 dams on the Columbia.
There's a reason why we have both the words "renewable" and "sustainable" - they do not mean the same thing.
Costa Rica will get more rain, which will "renew" the reservoirs behind the hydro dams. It's not raining 100% of the time, and the hydro dams release more volume of water than the rain provides in the same unit time, so it's not completely sustainable. But it is still a renewable resource.
No, but then some government body has a list of people that were so concerned with government eavesdropping that they went out of their way to prevent it. Sounds like a target list for investigation / abuse of power to me.
Well, it would no longer be mobile except for the couple million gallons of water they hosed over the whole thing. I imagine that made some of it mobile in ways that people don't appreciate.
The problem being it's utter bollocks [google.com]. Anything that becomes molten will mix into the fuel and dilute it, lowering the reaction rate and moving you further and further away from a self-sustaining reaction.
That's not the only reason it's complete horseshit - once you actually get to the center of the planet, the melting whatever that magically never dilutes would be moving opposite of gravity.
The whole concept is patently stupid.
Isn't it though? I remember when iTunes actually wasn't a completely fucked up pile of shit. It's been a long time.
Wait, are you saying that if you buy two devices from the same manufacturer, that they might work better together than two devices from wildly different vendors?
CRAZY TALK.
I haven't plugged my iPhone into anything iTunes since the iOS 5 release that allowed over-the-air updates and iCloud backup.
iTunes is a complete non-factor, and has been for years.
Apple clearly doesn't make a product that satisfies your requirements.
And you know what? That's perfectly fine. They don't need to. And you don't need them to. But the overwhelming vast majority of the market doesn't have the same requirements you do, and the products that Apple makes does meet their requirements.
I don't understand why Apple's products have to be everything to everyone - no other company is thought of this way. Do people get up in arms because BMW doesn't make heavy duty work trucks? Should people not buy Ford because they don't make motorcycles?
More than that, I want there to be at least two viable platforms out there. A healthy Android stack puts pressure on Apple to make iOS better. A healthy iOS stack puts pressure on Google to make Android better.
Who wins? We all do. I'd even like to see a better offering from Microsoft just to keep the other two honest. In a 3-way fight for my money, I'm the ultimate winner.
It must be a kindness, because they certainly don't do much to update them.
Google Voice was finally updated to support iOS 7 two days after iOS 8 shipped.
That's only the definition if you fail to think about it for 5 seconds.
Hint: there are different components in different phones, and different components have different costs. These costs are a component of the retail price.
Yes, there is a margin markup in the price because electronics companies are not charities. But the price difference between an android handset and an iPhone is not all margin.
Yeah, this sounds like a great idea until Cisco receives a subpoena for a list of all customers that used this service.
Whoops!
Lots of people keep saying this, but if it's only the last two letters that matter in distinguishing the plural form, then I submit to you:
Goose is to geese, as horse is to ???
A. Heese
B. Horses
C. You're an idiot
D. Both B and C.
Yeah, because the English language is incredibly consistent, and is never contradictory in any way.
Your argument fails on face value alone.
Especially considering the complete lack of compelling competition out there. When the games everyone seems to be looking forward to are Modern Warfare Black Ops 19 and Battlefield 7, which are exactly the same as the last 6 versions, how can you not want to put something out that breaks the mold of "multiplayer first, story last" ?
You aren't EA - we're not worried that you're just milking the IP of the past because there is a completely creatively bankrupt organization paying the bills.
As with all things in the completely screwed US tax code, there are rules.
You get a $250k ($500k if married) exemption if it is your primary residence.
If it is a rental / investment property you will have to pay a graduated rate that depends on your other annual income: 15% if you make less than $200k/year ($250k/year if married); add on a 3.8% medicare surcharge if you're between that and $400k/year ($450k/year if married) making it 18.8% of profits. If you're over that, then it's 20% cap gains + 3.8% medicare for 23.8% of profits. BUT, if you had the place for less than a year, the profit is taxed at your normal income tax rate, plus the 3.8% if your income is within the range stated above.
This is part of why everyone would like real tax reform to come out of Congress.
It's called a "capital gains tax" and it already exists.
If you sell a house / stock issue / option and actually gain a profit on it from your cost basis to acquire that asset, you owe tax on that profit. 15% if you have less than $413k/year income, 20% if you're over that.
If you sell at a loss, you don't owe tax, but you're also realizing a monetary loss that you wouldn't have otherwise had if you held onto the asset.
Good thing that most people that are self-downloading other browsers are not likely behind proxy servers, eh?
In PowerShell:
$source = "https://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-36.0.1-SSL"
$dest = Join-Path -Path $env:TEMP -ChildPath "firefox.zip"
$wc = New-Object system.net.webclient
$wc.downloadFile($source,$dest)