The reason it helps your mortgage is because you're actually paying the thing off.
Not true. If you get an interest only mortgage for 200,000, then in 25 years, you'll still owe 200,000. But because of inflation, that 200,000 will be worth much less, and it would be far easier to pay it off, as your income will be much higher.
Of course in practice interest only mortages are paid off with investments, but the far that interest has shrunk it remains.
Public debt over 100 years would have the same inflationary reduction effect * 8.
For sure, inflation has the other effects you mention. And that's the reason public debt has to be managed. I was just correcting the common misunderstanding that it needs to be paid off.
So there's different answers for different locales. London for example could not work without trains. It was the trains that were the catalyst for it to grow so big and for the housing to be made in the suburbs.
Likewise with Japan - it has a relatively small and long/thin main island, which is heavily populated. Universal car ownership won't work. But having trains running up and down the country and in and out of the cities works perfectly.
The UK roads are becoming increasingly congested, and that can't be cured by building more roads. The CPO and quality of life issues you've raised for rail also apply to roads. But there's also the issue that building more roads means more junctions. And junctions cause yet more congestion. It's not feasible to avoid more than a tiny number of junctions by making flyovers.
That's why it makes sense to invest in rail. Because every 1.x passenger means one fewer car on the road. It's very debatable whether HS2 is the best investment to make in rail. But the principle of investing in rail is not wrong.
If there are 3 people in your family, that's $30,000 per year your family will have to pay back sooner or later.
Classic mistake of thinking public debt is the same as private debt. You have to pay off private debt, because one day you will die. Public debt doesn't have to be paid off in a AAA economy, because they can outlive all the people.
Public debt only needs to service interest. It does not "need to be paid off sooner or later".
Meanwhile inflation shrinks the debt just as it does with a mortgage.
Or maybe they don't want to pay a 50% markup for the Apple logo.
You know what a logo is? Same as a brand - it's a promise of quality. For good or bad. If a product can demand a 50% mark up because of a given logo, it's because the logo has built up a significant level of trust in the high quality of the product, either directly or by word of mouth.
Most logos can't demand any markup whatsoever, because they have not built up a good reputation.
A button should "look" like a button. I don't mean skeuomorphics, but a button UI element should not look like a label or a plain embedded image - it should look like something I can interact with, and that's what shading did.
Those quote marks would be better in another place... A "button" should look like a button.... because that thing on the screen isn's a button. It's an area you can interact with by touching. But then most things on the screen are. A graphic, a line in a list box, a scroller, a hyperlink, a field, a title, a telephone number... If you draw a box/gradient/shadow around everything you can interact with, then almost everything ends up in a box/gradient/shadow.
On the web, we no longer need explicit "buttons". Even on the classic Slashdot page, which is about as old a design as you see, most clickable/touchable do not have boxes around them; they are not dressed up as buttons.
Buttons have mostly gone the way of purple underlined hyperlinks. We're used to the web now, we don't need the training wheels.
Native app design has simply lagged. It's playing catch up to the web. (At least in terms of UI appearance. Native apps of course are ahead in capability and performance, and always will be.)
I can understand that you have opinions about UIs, we all do. But what make you think you know better than people who's job it is? Someone who's probably studied the field, and spends every day weighing up the pros and cons of different design decisions. And who, at least at the level of commercial OS UI design, has actually tested different design elements out with users and done metrics to test their effectiveness?
It's reminiscent of people who think they know better how to teach kids than teachers do. Or how scientists are wrong about the dangers of mobile phone transmitters or climate change.
That's not to say individual practitioners in any of those fields can't be wrong. But for a non practitioner to believe that the entire thrust of the profession has it wrong, and their conservatism is right is misguided.
40 years ago the question was whether pocket calculators made learning any easier or better. 40 years before that they were debating whether pen and paper was any improvement on slates and chalk.
Middle aged people who aren't teachers think that the proper way of schooling is the way it happened when they themselves were at school. Which means 20-40 years out of date on whatever the new technology is.
Let's leave it to teachers to say what they think is best.
No, that's not the definition of proprietary. Being a "closed network" and indeed a closed protocol does indeed make it proprietary.
And it's interesting that you are giving bonus points for Google leveraging SMS when Apple does too.
Basically, you are starting from the position - Google right, Apple wrong - then making up your own definitions and rules to support that conclusion. That's intellectually corrupt.
So much for the claim that Android has already had an Apple Pay equivalent for ages. Big difference between having a NFC capability and a secure payment system.
Sure. But conservatives don't believe in peak oil. They believe that oil production can keep rising indefinitely. Not because of science, but just because they lack the ability to see that things change.
the German government was prohibited from having heavy weapons by treaty, so they in turn decided that they didn't want a civilian population as well armed as the government and began taking away people's right to own weapons. This in turn left the civilian population vulnerable to the type of thuggery that the Nazi party used in order to intimidate people at the local level.
Note that it was Hitler who deregulated gun ownership for all people except the Jews.
Note also that Hitler and the Nazis came to power democratically. So there wasn't a moral majority who would have resisted had they only had weapons.
Could be. A product that starts with a layered photoshop file and ends in a web site is a valid product idea. Not automatic at all, but starting with slicing and going from there. And making it easy to allocate the slices and layers to DIVS with a useful hierarchy, and the right metrics.
Maybe they've decided the simply can't compete in the standard browser market. Which sounds about right. So a special purpose browser could give them a product people want.
I write code in the editor of my choice, then I open chrome and look at my results.
Presumably as you continue to tweak the code, you have to save and wait for the browser to notice one of the source files has changed. An IDE like browser could update live and instantly from memory, every time the source changes to something legally parsable.
And of course browsers already have built in developer tools, and/or plugins. But there's so much more that's possible.
And you can die from being hit by lightning on the golf-course, out of the blue. But that doesn't stop people playing golf. Things with extremely low probability aren't worth altering your life to avoid.
Note the probability here isn't just being persued for a crime you didn't commit, but that you also have something on your phone that provides convincing but false evidence of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop apologising for abusers. You're part of the problem.
The reason it helps your mortgage is because you're actually paying the thing off.
Not true. If you get an interest only mortgage for 200,000, then in 25 years, you'll still owe 200,000. But because of inflation, that 200,000 will be worth much less, and it would be far easier to pay it off, as your income will be much higher.
Of course in practice interest only mortages are paid off with investments, but the far that interest has shrunk it remains.
Public debt over 100 years would have the same inflationary reduction effect * 8.
For sure, inflation has the other effects you mention. And that's the reason public debt has to be managed. I was just correcting the common misunderstanding that it needs to be paid off.
So there's different answers for different locales. London for example could not work without trains. It was the trains that were the catalyst for it to grow so big and for the housing to be made in the suburbs.
Likewise with Japan - it has a relatively small and long/thin main island, which is heavily populated. Universal car ownership won't work. But having trains running up and down the country and in and out of the cities works perfectly.
The UK roads are becoming increasingly congested, and that can't be cured by building more roads. The CPO and quality of life issues you've raised for rail also apply to roads. But there's also the issue that building more roads means more junctions. And junctions cause yet more congestion. It's not feasible to avoid more than a tiny number of junctions by making flyovers.
That's why it makes sense to invest in rail. Because every 1.x passenger means one fewer car on the road. It's very debatable whether HS2 is the best investment to make in rail. But the principle of investing in rail is not wrong.
If there are 3 people in your family, that's $30,000 per year your family will have to pay back sooner or later.
Classic mistake of thinking public debt is the same as private debt. You have to pay off private debt, because one day you will die. Public debt doesn't have to be paid off in a AAA economy, because they can outlive all the people.
Public debt only needs to service interest. It does not "need to be paid off sooner or later".
Meanwhile inflation shrinks the debt just as it does with a mortgage.
What's the cost of driving a car BEFORE all those subsidies?
Or maybe they don't want to pay a 50% markup for the Apple logo.
You know what a logo is? Same as a brand - it's a promise of quality. For good or bad. If a product can demand a 50% mark up because of a given logo, it's because the logo has built up a significant level of trust in the high quality of the product, either directly or by word of mouth.
Most logos can't demand any markup whatsoever, because they have not built up a good reputation.
A button should "look" like a button. I don't mean skeuomorphics, but a button UI element should not look like a label or a plain embedded image - it should look like something I can interact with, and that's what shading did.
Those quote marks would be better in another place... A "button" should look like a button. ... because that thing on the screen isn's a button. It's an area you can interact with by touching. But then most things on the screen are. A graphic, a line in a list box, a scroller, a hyperlink, a field, a title, a telephone number... If you draw a box/gradient/shadow around everything you can interact with, then almost everything ends up in a box/gradient/shadow.
On the web, we no longer need explicit "buttons". Even on the classic Slashdot page, which is about as old a design as you see, most clickable/touchable do not have boxes around them; they are not dressed up as buttons.
Buttons have mostly gone the way of purple underlined hyperlinks. We're used to the web now, we don't need the training wheels.
Native app design has simply lagged. It's playing catch up to the web. (At least in terms of UI appearance. Native apps of course are ahead in capability and performance, and always will be.)
I can understand that you have opinions about UIs, we all do. But what make you think you know better than people who's job it is? Someone who's probably studied the field, and spends every day weighing up the pros and cons of different design decisions. And who, at least at the level of commercial OS UI design, has actually tested different design elements out with users and done metrics to test their effectiveness?
It's reminiscent of people who think they know better how to teach kids than teachers do. Or how scientists are wrong about the dangers of mobile phone transmitters or climate change.
That's not to say individual practitioners in any of those fields can't be wrong. But for a non practitioner to believe that the entire thrust of the profession has it wrong, and their conservatism is right is misguided.
40 years ago the question was whether pocket calculators made learning any easier or better. 40 years before that they were debating whether pen and paper was any improvement on slates and chalk.
Middle aged people who aren't teachers think that the proper way of schooling is the way it happened when they themselves were at school. Which means 20-40 years out of date on whatever the new technology is.
Let's leave it to teachers to say what they think is best.
No, that's not the definition of proprietary. Being a "closed network" and indeed a closed protocol does indeed make it proprietary.
And it's interesting that you are giving bonus points for Google leveraging SMS when Apple does too.
Basically, you are starting from the position - Google right, Apple wrong - then making up your own definitions and rules to support that conclusion. That's intellectually corrupt.
Google Voice is US only, and Google Hangouts is every bit as proprietary as iMessage.
February 14, 2012 to April 3, 2012 - is 18 days.
And it's interesting that you had to go back 2.5 years for your mistaken example.
Clearly it's not the same thing when Android needs one of these SoCs to achieve Apple Pay functionality. Try a little logic dude.
So much for the claim that Android has already had an Apple Pay equivalent for ages. Big difference between having a NFC capability and a secure payment system.
You seem to be confusing chraging stations with Tesla Supercharger stations. There are chargind stations even in the Hickville states you refer to.
e.g. http://www.dasolar.com/ev-char...
http://chargemap.com/city/birm...
Sure. But conservatives don't believe in peak oil. They believe that oil production can keep rising indefinitely. Not because of science, but just because they lack the ability to see that things change.
Internal combustion engine cars - dirty and old fashioned, just like their conservative fans.
the German government was prohibited from having heavy weapons by treaty, so they in turn decided that they didn't want a civilian population as well armed as the government and began taking away people's right to own weapons. This in turn left the civilian population vulnerable to the type of thuggery that the Nazi party used in order to intimidate people at the local level.
Note that it was Hitler who deregulated gun ownership for all people except the Jews.
Note also that Hitler and the Nazis came to power democratically. So there wasn't a moral majority who would have resisted had they only had weapons.
So this wasn't a innocent. He wasn't only stockpiling drugs, he was forging prescriptions to get more.
The story, and earlier messages in the thread. "LEOs", "felonies" and "misdemeanours".
Could be. A product that starts with a layered photoshop file and ends in a web site is a valid product idea. Not automatic at all, but starting with slicing and going from there. And making it easy to allocate the slices and layers to DIVS with a useful hierarchy, and the right metrics.
Maybe they've decided the simply can't compete in the standard browser market. Which sounds about right. So a special purpose browser could give them a product people want.
I write code in the editor of my choice, then I open chrome and look at my results.
Presumably as you continue to tweak the code, you have to save and wait for the browser to notice one of the source files has changed. An IDE like browser could update live and instantly from memory, every time the source changes to something legally parsable.
And of course browsers already have built in developer tools, and/or plugins. But there's so much more that's possible.
And you can die from being hit by lightning on the golf-course, out of the blue. But that doesn't stop people playing golf. Things with extremely low probability aren't worth altering your life to avoid.
Note the probability here isn't just being persued for a crime you didn't commit, but that you also have something on your phone that provides convincing but false evidence of it.