It is intended to be down to $100 by 2008. For the record, some casual browsing turned up a brand new AMD powered Compaq for only $400. I bet by 2008, we'll be down to $350 or $300. Of course, you can find your fill of used laptops on eBay for $100 that offer several multiples of the performance of the OLPC. But I guess it's about the widgety kid-tailored interface.
Somehow, I suspect by the time OLPC manages to research its way into a $100 laptop for kids, the majors will be beating down the doors with the same product. Oh, well. Best of luck to 'em anyway.
Wow. $400 is expensive even for TWO $100 laptops, heck, even 3. Probably would be a good price for 5 of them though, and a downright bargain for 6 of them.
I find it ironic that the OLPC project is always regarded with such high praise, while any mention of a school district investing in laptops is always met with disdain and remarks such as "why does a kid need a laptop anyway? He'll just break it/lose it/trade it for drugs".
Frequently on a geological scale. I used to get hand-me-downs that were already a year old, and were not replaced during my time with the company. The only time I got one replaced while in the same company was when my first one was stolen, and they gave me a different hand-me-down. I only got my first brand new laptop about a year ago, but it was bought without my input from Compusa (an HP). It sucked hard. Kept turning off with no notice, and when you rebooted, it would get so far and turn off again. Nobody believed me. I got them to get me a Dell after much whining, and they gave the laptop to somebody else, who had the same problems. They replaced the motherboard, and after that it still had the same problems. They need to drop it off the sixth floor roof. But I believe it is still making the rounds in our company, sadly.
Coming up with a solution for a given problem is hard, thankless work.
Coming up with a problem for a given solution, on the other hand, is just marketing.
Don't even worry about it. They spent far more than that on their own legal defenses. It's not about making money, it's about making someone else lose theirs.
It is the staying popular that is the difficult bit, one hit wonders will never reach that point.
Especially since staying popular is heavily influenced by what the record industry decides to do or not do for you.
You went bankrupt because of debt, and the first thing you do when you get out of bankruptcy is go get a car loan?
Seems like someone hasn't learned their lesson.
I agree, those banks haven't learned their lesson. But why should they, when the Gov't will bail them out of any bad lending decisions they make?
I know it is the law, but it seems ridiculous for her to have to pay for credit counseling. I mean, for all we know she is very responsible with her credit. The only reason she needs to declare bankruptcy is this overzealous judgment against her. If I were her creditors, I'd be pissed. They've presumably been collecting from her reasonably well and now RIAA has gone on gotten all of their credit canceled.
I think CC companies (and anyone for that matter) should be able to charge any interest rate they want to as long as it's clearly documented to person getting the loan. No one has to charge 20k worth of stuff. What ever happened to saving up to buy something? I would hope that by this point everyone knows that carrying a balance on a CC is a bad financial move. Why do people still do it?
It's not a bad move if the credit card companies are honest. I had a 3% for life rate on a credit card from Bank of America. Of course, the stipulation is that you pay on time. So I transferred the balance of my car loan (which was about 8%) to the credit card. And I made my payments on time. Until one month, I opened up my bill 10 days before the due date only to find that they had moved my due date UP by 10 days with no prior notice, and that I was already one day late. Up goes the rate to 22%.
This is not the first time this has happened to me. You would think I would learn that when they give you these rates, they are going to dick with you anyway they can to try to screw you up.
MBNA did that to me. I had a low rate for life, something like 2%, and they sent out a notice (or so they say) where they indicated they were going to raise my 2% to 21% and if I disagreed, I had to notify in writing by such-and-such time. Well, I didn't get the notice, and I didn't respond, and my rate went up.
They are all crooks.
I'm sure you think the same as I do: A Cost of Living increase is not a raise. It merely says that in last year dollar terms, you are worth the same this year as you were last year, and should get to enjoy the same lifestyle. A Cost of Living increase without a raise indicates that they don't believe you have learned anything new or learned how to do your job any better than you did last year. If they give you no raise and no Cost Of Living, then your company feels that you are worth approximately 3% less this year than you were last year, so in effect they have lowered your last year dollars salary.
I have personally had an effective 3% pay cut for the last 3 years. And I felt like I was underpaid when I started the job, but they lied to me about stock options and raises. You'd think I would learn after awhile that all companies lie to you about your future, especially the ones that say they are not like the other companies.
You have to be careful when you become independent. I was an independent for about 5 years, and after 9/11, my client ended the contract early, and I wasn't able to find any other contracts available. Not only that, but the corporate jobs were few and far between, and all of the job requirements said "corporates only". In other words, no ex-consultants need apply. Their view is that consultants need to be punished for standing up for their right to get paid for the hours the worked, and for not being a good sheep and taking their lumps like the rest of the corporate workers. Also, they reasoned that a consultant would be more likely to walk out as soon as the economy improved. Of course, we know that an employee would NEVER consider trying his luck elsewhere when the headhunters are calling nonstop.
Getting a green card in the case of marriage may not take long, but getting citizenship will still take awhile. My wife applied for citizenship this summer and received a note saying that they would schedule her interview within the next 365 days, and if she doesn't hear from them in that timeframe to contact yada, yada, yada.
I imagine NASA would have filled the position by then.
Hmm, well, they seem to not want to pay me until I have $100 balance in adsense, but they are perfectly happy to bill me every month when I owe them $6.03 for adwords.
We just completely stopped our Google Adwords advertising. We have looked at print, mail, radio and other media advertising, but every time we run the estimated numbers, we find that spending money on advertising would bring us less money in increased sales than we spent on the campaign. I have long suspected, and now believe strongly that the marketers are best not at selling your products but at selling the idea that you need their services.
And in 30 years the success of he spaceport will have launched an industrious little town surrounding it, and then developers will come in and build houses right next to it, and people will move in, and complain about the noise, and get the spaceport successfully shut down.
Re:sounds like this was just a short flight
on
Steve Fossett Missing
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
That's a loaded statement. There are plenty of things in the world more dangerous than a GA aircraft. For example: a motorcycle, a chainsaw, a lawnmower. GA aircraft have a slightly poorer record than cars in terms of fatalities per hour, and a much better record in terms of accidents per hour. The vast majority of GA accidents have little to do with the mechanical condition of the plane, and much more to do with stupid things done by the user (imagine that).
As a business owner, I am aware that in some circumstances you are safer legally to NOT tell someone why you are, for example, firing them. If you give them a reason, they may be able to fight you in court, showing that somehow that reason isn't valid.
When you are dragged off to jail, though, and this is not to dispute your point, but I think it SHOULD be required that they tell you why. The reasons they don't are probably along the same lines as my example. If they give you some reason before researching it more fully, you may be able to get a judge to let you off the hook by showing that that reason was faulty or that you hadn't done what you were accused of. But given time to think of a more concrete reason for incarceration, they may be more likely to get something to stick.
Still, the fact that you may get thrown in jail even WITH some sort of accusation flies in the face of innocent until proven guilty. I mean, sure you are legally innocent, but that doesn't help you much when you still have to sit there in that stinky cell with some butt-raper, and then have to pay bail money to get you out (even though you are legally innocent.) And oh, by the way, do you get that bail money back if they are unable to prove you guilty? And do they pay for your lawyer's fees if they are unable to prove you guilty? Being innocent can cost a lot of money.
I bet you could talk your way out of it, though, if you had obviously paid for the other stuff. If Fryes is anything like Best Buy there is almost zero ability for you to get something in your bag between the register and the door. Their only argument is that you hid it on your person and slipped it into your bag after the register, which the cameras should show them is false, and the cameras would probably also show the cashier accidentally failing to scan the item.
I have inadvertently stolen before. I bought a engine hoist at Harbor Freight, and when they brought it up to the front, there were two boxes on the dolly. I figured maybe the main components were in one box and the ram was in the other, so I put both boxes into my car. When I got home and opened everything up, I found that the second box was actually a wholesale box of ratcheting tiedowns. I have no clue why they brought that to the front with them, as this is a box that should have been opened in the store and the contents sold individually. If I had been more honest, I would have returned the box, but that would have also cost me about a 40 mile round trip, which would cost me nearly as much in gas as they probably paid for that box of tiedowns. Hopefully they will have learned from this experience not to bring extra boxes up to the front and trust the customer to know which ones to take.
Whenever I watch a news story about something which I know something about, I find that they are inaccurate or misrepresentative. Interestingly, I find that even though I KNOW they have facts wrong on every single occasion that they reported on something I had knowledge of, it doesn't seem to shake me from accepting as accurate the items they report on of which I have NO knowledge. I believe this to be the case with most people.
If you don't want to show your receipt, shop elsewhere and pay slightly more to cover the theft losses. If everyone did that then stores would change policies.
Well, how about everybody just stops stealing stuff. Then, the stores wouldn't have to charge more to cover losses, wouldn't have to pay for loss-prevention employees, and wouldn't need all the fancy security.
It's not like they are stealing bread for their starving family. People are just stealing stuff because they want it. I loathe people like that.
I find it hard to believe that they can take you to the police station without having arrested you and that they can arrest you without telling you what they have arrested you for.
My father was once arrested for accidentally killing a nuisance goose that happened to be of the same species as the migratory geese, which I understand are considered endangered. However, at the time that it happened, an a-hole treehugger confronted my father and threatened him, and called the police, but the police could not think of anything to charge him with. A few days later, after constant pestering from the tree-hugger, the police found an obscure law and charged him with "taking a protected waterfowl". Ironically, my father just killed it. The tree-hugger is the one who took it, and buried it. I guess the upshot is, be very careful when driving around the streets of Illinois, where these geese are found by the 10s of thousands. If you run over it, and some a-hole treehugger who used to be a hunter and is now casting his selfloathing onto others happens to see it, you could be in for a very expensive trial.
Slashdot Mirror
It is intended to be down to $100 by 2008. For the record, some casual browsing turned up a brand new AMD powered Compaq for only $400. I bet by 2008, we'll be down to $350 or $300. Of course, you can find your fill of used laptops on eBay for $100 that offer several multiples of the performance of the OLPC. But I guess it's about the widgety kid-tailored interface.
Somehow, I suspect by the time OLPC manages to research its way into a $100 laptop for kids, the majors will be beating down the doors with the same product. Oh, well. Best of luck to 'em anyway.
Wow. $400 is expensive even for TWO $100 laptops, heck, even 3. Probably would be a good price for 5 of them though, and a downright bargain for 6 of them.
I find it ironic that the OLPC project is always regarded with such high praise, while any mention of a school district investing in laptops is always met with disdain and remarks such as "why does a kid need a laptop anyway? He'll just break it/lose it/trade it for drugs".
Frequently on a geological scale. I used to get hand-me-downs that were already a year old, and were not replaced during my time with the company. The only time I got one replaced while in the same company was when my first one was stolen, and they gave me a different hand-me-down. I only got my first brand new laptop about a year ago, but it was bought without my input from Compusa (an HP). It sucked hard. Kept turning off with no notice, and when you rebooted, it would get so far and turn off again. Nobody believed me. I got them to get me a Dell after much whining, and they gave the laptop to somebody else, who had the same problems. They replaced the motherboard, and after that it still had the same problems. They need to drop it off the sixth floor roof. But I believe it is still making the rounds in our company, sadly.
Coming up with a solution for a given problem is hard, thankless work.
Coming up with a problem for a given solution, on the other hand, is just marketing.
Don't even worry about it. They spent far more than that on their own legal defenses. It's not about making money, it's about making someone else lose theirs.
It is the staying popular that is the difficult bit, one hit wonders will never reach that point.
Especially since staying popular is heavily influenced by what the record industry decides to do or not do for you.
You went bankrupt because of debt, and the first thing you do when you get out of bankruptcy is go get a car loan?
Seems like someone hasn't learned their lesson.
I agree, those banks haven't learned their lesson. But why should they, when the Gov't will bail them out of any bad lending decisions they make?
I know it is the law, but it seems ridiculous for her to have to pay for credit counseling. I mean, for all we know she is very responsible with her credit. The only reason she needs to declare bankruptcy is this overzealous judgment against her. If I were her creditors, I'd be pissed. They've presumably been collecting from her reasonably well and now RIAA has gone on gotten all of their credit canceled.
I am no lawyer, but I think that they would have to cancel that debt prior to her declaring bankruptcy for that to work.
I think CC companies (and anyone for that matter) should be able to charge any interest rate they want to as long as it's clearly documented to person getting the loan. No one has to charge 20k worth of stuff. What ever happened to saving up to buy something? I would hope that by this point everyone knows that carrying a balance on a CC is a bad financial move. Why do people still do it? It's not a bad move if the credit card companies are honest. I had a 3% for life rate on a credit card from Bank of America. Of course, the stipulation is that you pay on time. So I transferred the balance of my car loan (which was about 8%) to the credit card. And I made my payments on time. Until one month, I opened up my bill 10 days before the due date only to find that they had moved my due date UP by 10 days with no prior notice, and that I was already one day late. Up goes the rate to 22%.
This is not the first time this has happened to me. You would think I would learn that when they give you these rates, they are going to dick with you anyway they can to try to screw you up.
MBNA did that to me. I had a low rate for life, something like 2%, and they sent out a notice (or so they say) where they indicated they were going to raise my 2% to 21% and if I disagreed, I had to notify in writing by such-and-such time. Well, I didn't get the notice, and I didn't respond, and my rate went up.
They are all crooks.
I'm very wary of what 'monetize' might mean.
My guess is that they will make it "free" as in NetZero.
Economists are always wrong. The only thing they have going for them is that they are able to explain afterwards WHY they were wrong.
I'm sure you think the same as I do: A Cost of Living increase is not a raise. It merely says that in last year dollar terms, you are worth the same this year as you were last year, and should get to enjoy the same lifestyle. A Cost of Living increase without a raise indicates that they don't believe you have learned anything new or learned how to do your job any better than you did last year. If they give you no raise and no Cost Of Living, then your company feels that you are worth approximately 3% less this year than you were last year, so in effect they have lowered your last year dollars salary.
I have personally had an effective 3% pay cut for the last 3 years. And I felt like I was underpaid when I started the job, but they lied to me about stock options and raises. You'd think I would learn after awhile that all companies lie to you about your future, especially the ones that say they are not like the other companies.
You have to be careful when you become independent. I was an independent for about 5 years, and after 9/11, my client ended the contract early, and I wasn't able to find any other contracts available. Not only that, but the corporate jobs were few and far between, and all of the job requirements said "corporates only". In other words, no ex-consultants need apply. Their view is that consultants need to be punished for standing up for their right to get paid for the hours the worked, and for not being a good sheep and taking their lumps like the rest of the corporate workers. Also, they reasoned that a consultant would be more likely to walk out as soon as the economy improved. Of course, we know that an employee would NEVER consider trying his luck elsewhere when the headhunters are calling nonstop.
Getting a green card in the case of marriage may not take long, but getting citizenship will still take awhile. My wife applied for citizenship this summer and received a note saying that they would schedule her interview within the next 365 days, and if she doesn't hear from them in that timeframe to contact yada, yada, yada.
I imagine NASA would have filled the position by then.
Hmm, well, they seem to not want to pay me until I have $100 balance in adsense, but they are perfectly happy to bill me every month when I owe them $6.03 for adwords.
We just completely stopped our Google Adwords advertising. We have looked at print, mail, radio and other media advertising, but every time we run the estimated numbers, we find that spending money on advertising would bring us less money in increased sales than we spent on the campaign. I have long suspected, and now believe strongly that the marketers are best not at selling your products but at selling the idea that you need their services.
And in 30 years the success of he spaceport will have launched an industrious little town surrounding it, and then developers will come in and build houses right next to it, and people will move in, and complain about the noise, and get the spaceport successfully shut down.
That's a loaded statement. There are plenty of things in the world more dangerous than a GA aircraft. For example: a motorcycle, a chainsaw, a lawnmower. GA aircraft have a slightly poorer record than cars in terms of fatalities per hour, and a much better record in terms of accidents per hour. The vast majority of GA accidents have little to do with the mechanical condition of the plane, and much more to do with stupid things done by the user (imagine that).
As a business owner, I am aware that in some circumstances you are safer legally to NOT tell someone why you are, for example, firing them. If you give them a reason, they may be able to fight you in court, showing that somehow that reason isn't valid.
When you are dragged off to jail, though, and this is not to dispute your point, but I think it SHOULD be required that they tell you why. The reasons they don't are probably along the same lines as my example. If they give you some reason before researching it more fully, you may be able to get a judge to let you off the hook by showing that that reason was faulty or that you hadn't done what you were accused of. But given time to think of a more concrete reason for incarceration, they may be more likely to get something to stick.
Still, the fact that you may get thrown in jail even WITH some sort of accusation flies in the face of innocent until proven guilty. I mean, sure you are legally innocent, but that doesn't help you much when you still have to sit there in that stinky cell with some butt-raper, and then have to pay bail money to get you out (even though you are legally innocent.) And oh, by the way, do you get that bail money back if they are unable to prove you guilty? And do they pay for your lawyer's fees if they are unable to prove you guilty? Being innocent can cost a lot of money.
I bet you could talk your way out of it, though, if you had obviously paid for the other stuff. If Fryes is anything like Best Buy there is almost zero ability for you to get something in your bag between the register and the door. Their only argument is that you hid it on your person and slipped it into your bag after the register, which the cameras should show them is false, and the cameras would probably also show the cashier accidentally failing to scan the item.
I have inadvertently stolen before. I bought a engine hoist at Harbor Freight, and when they brought it up to the front, there were two boxes on the dolly. I figured maybe the main components were in one box and the ram was in the other, so I put both boxes into my car. When I got home and opened everything up, I found that the second box was actually a wholesale box of ratcheting tiedowns. I have no clue why they brought that to the front with them, as this is a box that should have been opened in the store and the contents sold individually. If I had been more honest, I would have returned the box, but that would have also cost me about a 40 mile round trip, which would cost me nearly as much in gas as they probably paid for that box of tiedowns. Hopefully they will have learned from this experience not to bring extra boxes up to the front and trust the customer to know which ones to take.
Whenever I watch a news story about something which I know something about, I find that they are inaccurate or misrepresentative. Interestingly, I find that even though I KNOW they have facts wrong on every single occasion that they reported on something I had knowledge of, it doesn't seem to shake me from accepting as accurate the items they report on of which I have NO knowledge. I believe this to be the case with most people.
If you don't want to show your receipt, shop elsewhere and pay slightly more to cover the theft losses. If everyone did that then stores would change policies.
Well, how about everybody just stops stealing stuff. Then, the stores wouldn't have to charge more to cover losses, wouldn't have to pay for loss-prevention employees, and wouldn't need all the fancy security.
It's not like they are stealing bread for their starving family. People are just stealing stuff because they want it. I loathe people like that.
I find it hard to believe that they can take you to the police station without having arrested you and that they can arrest you without telling you what they have arrested you for.
My father was once arrested for accidentally killing a nuisance goose that happened to be of the same species as the migratory geese, which I understand are considered endangered. However, at the time that it happened, an a-hole treehugger confronted my father and threatened him, and called the police, but the police could not think of anything to charge him with. A few days later, after constant pestering from the tree-hugger, the police found an obscure law and charged him with "taking a protected waterfowl". Ironically, my father just killed it. The tree-hugger is the one who took it, and buried it. I guess the upshot is, be very careful when driving around the streets of Illinois, where these geese are found by the 10s of thousands. If you run over it, and some a-hole treehugger who used to be a hunter and is now casting his selfloathing onto others happens to see it, you could be in for a very expensive trial.