US Ambassadorships have always been rewards for loyalty... both parties do it and it dates back to the 1800's. Ambassador's don't make policies or laws, they are generally just mouth pieces. Well educated, rich mouth pieces but mouthpieces. If you look at the list you'll notice something important, the awarded ambassadorships were for the UK, Sweden, Spain, etc. You won't find any countries we have serious political problems with on that list. Russia? John Teft whose been a foreign service officer since 1972 and was pulled out of retirement specifically to be posted in Russia. Afghanistan, P. Michael McKinley... a foreign service officer since 1982. Columbia? Kevin Whitaker, career foreign service officer. See the pattern here? For countries we're friends with... the ambassador is a "host". For countries we have an issue with they're always career politicians who know WTF is going on.
That's nice Chairman of the FCC and Secretary of the Treasury were there as well.
Fuck you for stooping to the level of the typical clickbait peddled by the shitty news outlets.
News for nerds? Stuff that matters? Is this either or the two or am I losing my mind?
Give me something actually about tech. I'm taking a break from your website and turning on ads in the future.
If you think whiny busybodies, that are trying to build careers by cultivating outrage don't matter in tech, reality has a rude awakening for you.
Says the person using a device whose fabrication would be impossible if not for the earlier results of high energy physics. We've been smashing stuff together since the middle of the last century, and most modern tech relies in what we've already learnt. Who knows what cern will enable in the future?
Funny thing those earlier accelerators were a hell of a lot cheaper. In dollars and constant dollars.
Hell the atomic bomb wasn't even the most expensive weapon system in WWII, that honor goes to the B-29
He didn't say CERN, he said high energy physics. High energy physics has been studied many times and many places. Without pure research in that field, all those inventions would've been missing foundational research and couldn't have happened.
Well lets look at that. Two out of three of those mentioned were from CERN, and they are being mentioned explicitly in the context of "How building big accelerators benefits most people". The foundational research for all those inventions didn't come from brobdingnagian accelerators.
So no your statement is in error and at best a distraction from the question what is the best way to use research funds.
world wide web, mobile phone touch screens and magnetic resonance imaging in hospitals, among other technological breakthroughs.
NMR not so much, magnetic resonance was an old result that Damadian had the vision to move forward when people were saying it was impossible Touch Screens ? BS Cern was hardly the only place working on the tech WWW ? Few tens of million Frenchmen would argue minitel was well on its way. Teletext was available here. Personally I could live without the craptastic kluge of CSS/Javascript/Html.
To give money, you have to take it in the first place. And when you take it, the opportunity cost means that that money cant be used to pay someone to produce something as well as consume. Instead you are taking money, taking a cut to support the bureaucracy that administers the money and basically you are paying somebody to not do anything at all. You are subsidizing non productivity and unemployment. When you tax something, you get less of it. When you subsidize something you get more of it. It's pretty simple
Well at this point I am pretty sure the point that tax rates play a large part in business decisions is well established. What you or I are trying do, well that's something readers can draw their own conclusions on.
Every you say is false. Any business run so close to maximum leverage that the funds required for quarterly taxes are the difference in project decision is about to declare bankruptcy.
vs
Yeah, especially now that in fact Apple is leaving Ireland it was a bad gamble violating Irish EU treaties, Irish public welfare, and all Irish interests.
Seems to me you're trying to deflect from your premise that successful companies don't make decisions based on taxes.
Every you say is false. Any business run so close to maximum leverage that the funds required for quarterly taxes are the difference in project decision is about to declare bankruptcy.
You mean like Apple deciding to locate in Ireland ?
Having an easy and accurate choice for consumers is far less preferable than making them look at all your products, and potentially have to decide on buying the more expensive on the basis it must be better.
I expect video card makers to change up their numbering systems any day now for just this reason.
Her handling of classified material was at a level that is normally handled administratively, not with criminal prosecution. Nobody's showed me an exception yet. The cases I've seen cited are either cases where the defendant deliberately moved classified material to a system not cleared for it, which Clinton didn't do, or they were handled administratively. That's a definite illegal action that she definitely committed, but if it's not normally prosecuted I don't consider it serious.
I'm still waiting.
I doubt anyone can show you anything why don't you just post all the things people have tried to show you, and put in the rebuttals.
Slashdot Mirror
US Ambassadorships have always been rewards for loyalty... both parties do it and it dates back to the 1800's. Ambassador's don't make policies or laws, they are generally just mouth pieces. Well educated, rich mouth pieces but mouthpieces. If you look at the list you'll notice something important, the awarded ambassadorships were for the UK, Sweden, Spain, etc. You won't find any countries we have serious political problems with on that list. Russia? John Teft whose been a foreign service officer since 1972 and was pulled out of retirement specifically to be posted in Russia. Afghanistan, P. Michael McKinley... a foreign service officer since 1982. Columbia? Kevin Whitaker, career foreign service officer. See the pattern here? For countries we're friends with... the ambassador is a "host". For countries we have an issue with they're always career politicians who know WTF is going on.
That's nice Chairman of the FCC and Secretary of the Treasury were there as well.
We toss in Monaco for free.
The US should remove all military from Europe and announce that they are no longer protecting any Europe bound or originating shipping lanes.
It would be great if US would do it. Europe could finally grow up and stop being an US lapdog :)
Vladimir is that you ?
Fuck you for stooping to the level of the typical clickbait peddled by the shitty news outlets. News for nerds? Stuff that matters? Is this either or the two or am I losing my mind? Give me something actually about tech. I'm taking a break from your website and turning on ads in the future.
If you think whiny busybodies, that are trying to build careers by cultivating outrage don't matter in tech, reality has a rude awakening for you.
Says the person using a device whose fabrication would be impossible if not for the earlier results of high energy physics. We've been smashing stuff together since the middle of the last century, and most modern tech relies in what we've already learnt. Who knows what cern will enable in the future?
Funny thing those earlier accelerators were a hell of a lot cheaper. In dollars and constant dollars.
Hell the atomic bomb wasn't even the most expensive weapon system in WWII, that honor goes to the B-29
< blink > ok < / blink>
He didn't say CERN, he said high energy physics. High energy physics has been studied many times and many places. Without pure research in that field, all those inventions would've been missing foundational research and couldn't have happened.
Well lets look at that. Two out of three of those mentioned were from CERN, and they are being mentioned explicitly in the context of "How building big accelerators benefits most people". The foundational research for all those inventions didn't come from brobdingnagian accelerators.
So no your statement is in error and at best a distraction from the question what is the best way to use research funds.
world wide web, mobile phone touch screens and magnetic resonance imaging in hospitals, among other technological breakthroughs.
NMR not so much, magnetic resonance was an old result that Damadian had the vision to move forward when people were saying it was impossible
Touch Screens ? BS Cern was hardly the only place working on the tech
WWW ? Few tens of million Frenchmen would argue minitel was well on its way. Teletext was available here. Personally I could live without the craptastic kluge of CSS/Javascript/Html.
Has an AOL account ?
Come on what does he use for personal information ? Myspace ?
And those have to do with fossil fuel or renewable subsidies how? Or do you just switch topics when you can't answer something?
I did answer your question. Sorry you can't understand why taxing competing products is relevant in shaping the marketplace.
Or is it that you do understand and went belligerent because you don't like where that goes ?
Oh I dunno, going to take those ridiculous taxes on gas off as well ?
No ridiculous subsidies for renewables
let people build hydro when and where they can
Stop getting in the way of coal
http://thehill.com/policy/cybe...
and the Democrats referred to their recent attacks as "Terrorism"
Yep especially in context of the prior post
To give money, you have to take it in the first place. And when you take it, the opportunity cost means that that money cant be used to pay someone to produce something as well as consume. Instead you are taking money, taking a cut to support the bureaucracy that administers the money and basically you are paying somebody to not do anything at all. You are subsidizing non productivity and unemployment. When you tax something, you get less of it. When you subsidize something you get more of it. It's pretty simple
Well at this point I am pretty sure the point that tax rates play a large part in business decisions is well established. What you or I are trying do, well that's something readers can draw their own conclusions on.
Every you say is false. Any business run so close to maximum leverage that the funds required for quarterly taxes are the difference in project decision is about to declare bankruptcy.
vs
Yeah, especially now that in fact Apple is leaving Ireland it was a bad gamble violating Irish EU treaties, Irish public welfare, and all Irish interests.
Seems to me you're trying to deflect from your premise that successful companies don't make decisions based on taxes.
Every you say is false. Any business run so close to maximum leverage that the funds required for quarterly taxes are the difference in project decision is about to declare bankruptcy.
You mean like Apple deciding to locate in Ireland ?
I appreciate your point, but let me ask, how do you know free flow of information and the ability to organize wouldn't have done them in ?
They actually had a much better consumer economy for awhile under Lenin's "New Economic Program"
Seems there's quite a few repressive regimes that want internet off switches and are looking to control the content of their nets.
Just off the top of my head, Saudi Arabia and China both take it very seriously.
Arab Spring ring a bell ?
Watch as 'trolling' becomes 'opinions I don't agree with'.
This is how 1984 becomes a reality.
P.S. Posting as AC because I don't have an account.
For some people that has always been the case.
I just gave you one that regularly lands people in jail for far less severe incidents.
C'mon, don't you want to shut me up on this subject?
No not really. I like the way you are making yourself look like an obvious troll, and Clinton supporters look like morons.
Having an easy and accurate choice for consumers is far less preferable than making them look at all your products, and potentially have to decide on buying the more expensive on the basis it must be better.
I expect video card makers to change up their numbering systems any day now for just this reason.
Reason enough to cheer this development.
(oh for the people that will leap to nuclear war, think coronal mass ejection)
Her handling of classified material was at a level that is normally handled administratively, not with criminal prosecution. Nobody's showed me an exception yet. The cases I've seen cited are either cases where the defendant deliberately moved classified material to a system not cleared for it, which Clinton didn't do, or they were handled administratively. That's a definite illegal action that she definitely committed, but if it's not normally prosecuted I don't consider it serious.
I'm still waiting.
I doubt anyone can show you anything why don't you just post all the things people have tried to show you, and put in the rebuttals.