I would guess so, since the most recent numbers I heard put their shipped Itanium systems at something like $20k-$250k, depending on configuration.
Granted, it's been a couple months and I wasn't terribly interested in the article, so I could be off by quite a bit, but HP's made a continued investment because they are actually still making money servicing whatever niche is filled by those Itanium systems.
It would be easier to blame it on that, were it actually true. Only about 10% of the prison population (~100,000 inmates) are incarcerated in prisons where the administration is run by a private corporation.
The vast majority of the pressure comes from the massive state and federal employee unions representing corrections officers, administrators, staff, and those in the justice and law enforcement departments which are staffed and run on the proceeds of asset forfeiture.
It's a nice bogey man, but the real bogeyman is far larger, nastier, and harder to get rid of.
That was my immediate first thought as well. Granted, it's actually only $1.5M USD, but I don't see it being realistic to "work off" that amount of money unless you are in the upper echelons of business or have significant ability to command top pay.
He'll end up doing whatever he likes for the rest of his life, content knowing that they cannot strip him of a lifestyle below whatever the garnishment floor in Sweden is. The only way he'd actually be impacted is if his behavior could result in him going to prison, and so engaging in behavior punishable only by monetary fines probably holds little deterrent value at this point.
That would fall under the latter half of my statement.
Rather than roll the dice with a loan and guessing where the economy is going to be 4 or more years later, there's this thing people used to do (some still do) to get through college when they didn't have parents with money, GI benefits, or stellar academics: worked through college using whatever means were available. Night classes, community college classes, half-time, quarter-time, whatever.
There are hardship exceptions I've heard that I actually believe, but most cases I've heard (directly or indirectly) involve someone who made a choice to do something with readily identifiable consequences not requiring the benefit of hindsight to see. Gambling is something you should do for fun, not complain about, or do not at all.
I can guarantee, unless you can't spare a single hour every day (with practice, a half hour), that you could cut your grocery bill in half immediately. Actually cooking, instead of reheating/reconstituting, has a vast number of benefits, of which cost is a single one. More than likely, your energy level and arteries would thank you too. You're at home, so it probably wouldn't be that difficult to work something out between yourself and your parent(s). If you're on good enough terms with them to be living rent-free, you can probably come together to slash your (and their) food budget. Even without cooperation, you can certainly do a number on your own, barring exceptional circumstances.
You get $72 more a month in lump sum, since the standard deduction and personal exemptions cover the entirety of your pay. Unless you're living in one of the really abusive income tax states, you're also probably (or should be) getting most of the state income tax back as well. That right there can knock off one loan payment, bringing the rest to about $600/month if you're only getting the Federal money back. Better if, as I suspect, you can also get some or most of your state taxes back.
As for the loans, that sucks. That's a gamble you made and are currently losing. On the bright side, in the long run you'll almost certainly make up for it unless your degree is in the liberal arts.
You can at least bring your current situation to temporary parity. It's highly unlikely that, with some creativity, more cannot be found in there.
Fine from an "I'm not likely to be targeted" standpoint. Legally, at least according to TFA, anything produced in the USA post-1996 and later sold in commerce must have CC content or is subject to FCC fines after the 2014 deadline.
So, realistically you're fine if nobody cares about your production. Get noticed by the wrong person, however, and you'll be pulling your production or paying to have it captioned.
This is why up-close and personal political powers belong in the hands of governments no further away than a few hundred miles. National federated governments are not accountable to their populations and so should not have powers which directly touch on those citizens, except in very broad, general ways.
It's not harder to buy the EU vote, since all the member parliaments are already bought and paid for.
In the end, it probably cost about the same per PM on both sides Atlantic.
As for MS, they got into the trouble they did because they had not yet discovered the benefit of buying politicians at that point. They learned their lesson very quickly.
You can be forward-thinking and still be realistic about how companies typically select employees for public-facing positions.
In addition, swillden's description was probably the most non-judgmental analysis of that particular employee issue I've read to date. The only real implicit judgment in the statement was actually in regard to his assumptions about Apple, not the people they hire for front-line retail positions.
I quite agree. If someone cannot support themselves full time on $12/hr, they've made poor choices about where they live in relation to the work they are able to accomplish, or even poorer day-to-day or month-to-month money management choices.
My circumstances are seriously edge-case as concerns why my income is so low, but I have a good standard of living in a moderately-sized US city netting half that amount. Doubling my income would actually afford me private health insurance.
Motorola came out much better than Apple. They only had one patent in contest, and couldn't come up with a rational figure for damages that would warrant an injunction of Apple's product line.
It was less about Motorola's hardware patent (again, they only had one left to assert in this particular case) being worthless and more about the requested remedy not fitting the scale of infringement they could reasonably prove.
Doubleplusungood is an understatement, even were it possible to do as Twinbee suggests.
Language speciation is alive and well, and evident to anyone who has traveled extensively in predominantly "monolingual" areas. The very concept of unifying (to the exclusion of others) language on any sort of large scale is at odds with basic human psychology and sociology.
A stable socialist state is not something in the cards for the US, hence comparing it to Italy is far more appropriate than comparing it to Norway or Sweden.
No matter which direction the government goes, systematic corruption will remain the order of the day.
Unfortunately, many people equate "Can't do X" with some form of stupidity. I'd say it's a form of stupidity, but that would just start a recursion loop.:)
like a fascist Eeyore. "Can't win; guess we might as well have a dictator and fake elections 'cause at least it's better than being run by corporations. OOOOO-kay."
The above conjured some of the most disturbingly hilarious imagery for me. Thank you for that.
If that's your security model, have fun not using anything you didn't compile from source yourself, since unless you manually verify all source prior to compile, then compile it, you have no idea if any software you run phones home.
No, you only need the relatively limited transistor count necessary for 2D output. All those extra transistors for the acceleration functions are a complete and total waste of space.
Anyway, back on-point, current ARM processors are designed architecturally with explicit security considerations in mind which are fundamentally impossible to implement on x86 cores, so no, you actually can't just "use the GPU."
IT/CS fields are unforgiving, unrelenting, and unappreciated in society as a whole.
Exactly. This is pretty much the combination that guarantees a low turnout of anyone who does not fit a very specific demographic. Women, in general, don't seem to fit that demographic. If it's because of some social ill, it has causes which reach women far before they hit college. Blaming academia or industry, in that case, is simply moronic. If you think women don't enter IT in the same numbers as men, you need to find the underlying problem and address it, but it appears long before industry or academia have a role in shaping the choices of any given woman in question.
If you look at any field that is unforgiving, unrelenting, and unappreciated societally, you are not likely to find it populated by women in proportion to their representation in society at large. Be my guest in trying to fix it if you believe it indicates something is fundamentally broken which causes it, but don't pretend it's caused by colleges or the workplace.
Men take shitty jobs, and the lower the social status of a given man and woman, the shittier the jobs you're likely to find a man doing in relation to what the woman is doing*. Call it sexism, but the genders are biologically different in more respects than which reproductive parts they possess. This will always result in differences in psychology, which in turn causes different generalities when you look at broad sections of both gender. Yes, there are differences which aren't necessarily due strictly to biology, but not every difference can be boiled down to "zomg society is oppressing group X!"
*The one major exception I can think of is at the very bottom rung, and that's subsistence prostitution. That, of course, can likely be laid directly at the feet of supply and demand.
In the US, retailers try to entice people into their station with a 2-3c difference per gallon, since their profits are derived wholely from in-store sales. The lowest price ones are the stores selling gasoline without proprietary additives from the major labels, and they can only undercut by maybe 5c/gallon before losing profitability. The lack of margins and the fact that all the gas comes from the same terminals means there's really no price competition in the States.
Slashdot Mirror
I would guess so, since the most recent numbers I heard put their shipped Itanium systems at something like $20k-$250k, depending on configuration.
Granted, it's been a couple months and I wasn't terribly interested in the article, so I could be off by quite a bit, but HP's made a continued investment because they are actually still making money servicing whatever niche is filled by those Itanium systems.
It would be easier to blame it on that, were it actually true. Only about 10% of the prison population (~100,000 inmates) are incarcerated in prisons where the administration is run by a private corporation.
The vast majority of the pressure comes from the massive state and federal employee unions representing corrections officers, administrators, staff, and those in the justice and law enforcement departments which are staffed and run on the proceeds of asset forfeiture.
It's a nice bogey man, but the real bogeyman is far larger, nastier, and harder to get rid of.
Actually, I vote for both heads together in the same scene.
That was my immediate first thought as well. Granted, it's actually only $1.5M USD, but I don't see it being realistic to "work off" that amount of money unless you are in the upper echelons of business or have significant ability to command top pay.
He'll end up doing whatever he likes for the rest of his life, content knowing that they cannot strip him of a lifestyle below whatever the garnishment floor in Sweden is. The only way he'd actually be impacted is if his behavior could result in him going to prison, and so engaging in behavior punishable only by monetary fines probably holds little deterrent value at this point.
That would fall under the latter half of my statement.
Rather than roll the dice with a loan and guessing where the economy is going to be 4 or more years later, there's this thing people used to do (some still do) to get through college when they didn't have parents with money, GI benefits, or stellar academics: worked through college using whatever means were available. Night classes, community college classes, half-time, quarter-time, whatever.
There are hardship exceptions I've heard that I actually believe, but most cases I've heard (directly or indirectly) involve someone who made a choice to do something with readily identifiable consequences not requiring the benefit of hindsight to see. Gambling is something you should do for fun, not complain about, or do not at all.
I can guarantee, unless you can't spare a single hour every day (with practice, a half hour), that you could cut your grocery bill in half immediately. Actually cooking, instead of reheating/reconstituting, has a vast number of benefits, of which cost is a single one. More than likely, your energy level and arteries would thank you too. You're at home, so it probably wouldn't be that difficult to work something out between yourself and your parent(s). If you're on good enough terms with them to be living rent-free, you can probably come together to slash your (and their) food budget. Even without cooperation, you can certainly do a number on your own, barring exceptional circumstances.
You get $72 more a month in lump sum, since the standard deduction and personal exemptions cover the entirety of your pay. Unless you're living in one of the really abusive income tax states, you're also probably (or should be) getting most of the state income tax back as well. That right there can knock off one loan payment, bringing the rest to about $600/month if you're only getting the Federal money back. Better if, as I suspect, you can also get some or most of your state taxes back.
As for the loans, that sucks. That's a gamble you made and are currently losing. On the bright side, in the long run you'll almost certainly make up for it unless your degree is in the liberal arts.
You can at least bring your current situation to temporary parity. It's highly unlikely that, with some creativity, more cannot be found in there.
Fine from an "I'm not likely to be targeted" standpoint. Legally, at least according to TFA, anything produced in the USA post-1996 and later sold in commerce must have CC content or is subject to FCC fines after the 2014 deadline.
So, realistically you're fine if nobody cares about your production. Get noticed by the wrong person, however, and you'll be pulling your production or paying to have it captioned.
I think pointyhat meant the fabled Internet Chuck Norris. The one who has never existed.
This is why up-close and personal political powers belong in the hands of governments no further away than a few hundred miles. National federated governments are not accountable to their populations and so should not have powers which directly touch on those citizens, except in very broad, general ways.
It's not harder to buy the EU vote, since all the member parliaments are already bought and paid for.
In the end, it probably cost about the same per PM on both sides Atlantic.
As for MS, they got into the trouble they did because they had not yet discovered the benefit of buying politicians at that point. They learned their lesson very quickly.
I do support someone else as well.
So still not buying it.
Children are a choice.
You can be forward-thinking and still be realistic about how companies typically select employees for public-facing positions.
In addition, swillden's description was probably the most non-judgmental analysis of that particular employee issue I've read to date. The only real implicit judgment in the statement was actually in regard to his assumptions about Apple, not the people they hire for front-line retail positions.
I quite agree. If someone cannot support themselves full time on $12/hr, they've made poor choices about where they live in relation to the work they are able to accomplish, or even poorer day-to-day or month-to-month money management choices.
My circumstances are seriously edge-case as concerns why my income is so low, but I have a good standard of living in a moderately-sized US city netting half that amount. Doubling my income would actually afford me private health insurance.
That's fine, but my post was in response to:
For all you know, Ghostery might be spying on you more effectively than google and failbook combined.
It works for either part of your above point, so long as that standard is used for both sides of the comparison. I don't see the added value.
Motorola came out much better than Apple. They only had one patent in contest, and couldn't come up with a rational figure for damages that would warrant an injunction of Apple's product line.
It was less about Motorola's hardware patent (again, they only had one left to assert in this particular case) being worthless and more about the requested remedy not fitting the scale of infringement they could reasonably prove.
Of course, but the rules of a language are frequently clearer to those who do not speak it natively. :)
Ah, Japanese. A language were you can be incredibly precise and confoundly vague at the exact same time. :)
Doubleplusungood is an understatement, even were it possible to do as Twinbee suggests.
Language speciation is alive and well, and evident to anyone who has traveled extensively in predominantly "monolingual" areas. The very concept of unifying (to the exclusion of others) language on any sort of large scale is at odds with basic human psychology and sociology.
I shouldn't have used the word stable, but the appropriate adjective is not reaching my currently-addled brain.
A stable socialist state is not something in the cards for the US, hence comparing it to Italy is far more appropriate than comparing it to Norway or Sweden.
No matter which direction the government goes, systematic corruption will remain the order of the day.
Unfortunately, many people equate "Can't do X" with some form of stupidity. I'd say it's a form of stupidity, but that would just start a recursion loop. :)
like a fascist Eeyore. "Can't win; guess we might as well have a dictator and fake elections 'cause at least it's better than being run by corporations. OOOOO-kay."
The above conjured some of the most disturbingly hilarious imagery for me. Thank you for that.
If that's your security model, have fun not using anything you didn't compile from source yourself, since unless you manually verify all source prior to compile, then compile it, you have no idea if any software you run phones home.
No, you only need the relatively limited transistor count necessary for 2D output. All those extra transistors for the acceleration functions are a complete and total waste of space.
Anyway, back on-point, current ARM processors are designed architecturally with explicit security considerations in mind which are fundamentally impossible to implement on x86 cores, so no, you actually can't just "use the GPU."
IT/CS fields are unforgiving, unrelenting, and unappreciated in society as a whole.
Exactly. This is pretty much the combination that guarantees a low turnout of anyone who does not fit a very specific demographic. Women, in general, don't seem to fit that demographic. If it's because of some social ill, it has causes which reach women far before they hit college. Blaming academia or industry, in that case, is simply moronic. If you think women don't enter IT in the same numbers as men, you need to find the underlying problem and address it, but it appears long before industry or academia have a role in shaping the choices of any given woman in question.
If you look at any field that is unforgiving, unrelenting, and unappreciated societally, you are not likely to find it populated by women in proportion to their representation in society at large. Be my guest in trying to fix it if you believe it indicates something is fundamentally broken which causes it, but don't pretend it's caused by colleges or the workplace.
Men take shitty jobs, and the lower the social status of a given man and woman, the shittier the jobs you're likely to find a man doing in relation to what the woman is doing*. Call it sexism, but the genders are biologically different in more respects than which reproductive parts they possess. This will always result in differences in psychology, which in turn causes different generalities when you look at broad sections of both gender. Yes, there are differences which aren't necessarily due strictly to biology, but not every difference can be boiled down to "zomg society is oppressing group X!"
*The one major exception I can think of is at the very bottom rung, and that's subsistence prostitution. That, of course, can likely be laid directly at the feet of supply and demand.
In the US, retailers try to entice people into their station with a 2-3c difference per gallon, since their profits are derived wholely from in-store sales. The lowest price ones are the stores selling gasoline without proprietary additives from the major labels, and they can only undercut by maybe 5c/gallon before losing profitability. The lack of margins and the fact that all the gas comes from the same terminals means there's really no price competition in the States.