My address works right, but my parents' doesn't (it's only about a mile off, but it's not right).
I did take a look at the google sat pictures, and they don't have my hometown in very good resolution, but it is good enough to see my parents' acreage.
My preference: Set it to identify itself as something it's not.
Change your qmail banner string to read what an exchange server would read - an old, unpatched exchange server - and then watch the consultant's smile disappear after they list all of the vulnerabilities that you've got and you tell them that you were lying.
Talk them into hiring a full time IT guy - you're a mechanical engineer, and IT isn't your strong point. Get someone in who has more of a background in IT so that you can do your engineering stuff.
If they are doing a lot of consulting (and, apparently, recovery), they may find that they can hire an IT guy for what they're paying for consultants.
I suspect that GMO crops will turn out to be the answer. You'll see corn specifically engineered to produce more sugars for ethanol production. I've seen articles about modifying corn or other crops to inexpensively produce precursors for drugs.
I don't think it will take too much of that kind of segmentation to reduce the size of the garden variety commodity enough to move the price of that commodity.
Farming in America is a perfectly competitive market, meaning that sale prices between firms naturally balance themselves out.
Which is why I said that if the farmers were able to decommoditize their produce, they would segment the market (and make it less perfectly competitive) and be able to command more pricing power.
We also send lots of food overseas to those areas where people are starving. Part of the problem isn't getting the food (or other aid) to the areas - it's actually getting the food (or other aid) past the corrupt locals and into the hands of those who need it.
I never got that far - never been in the market for a new car (which was also a requirement for the 0% interest if I recall correctly).
From what I understand, GMAC is not run like a bank and doesn't have to defend its loans from examiners like a bank would - and now they are starting to pay the price as their debt is spiraling towards junk status.
As far as the interest goes - that's all well and good as long as they're receiving payments. It doesn't take too much bad debt to cut into that slim margin that you were talking about!
GM's profitable division is the GMAC financing arm. Operationally speaking, GM is actually a bank.
A few years ago, I heard it was the other way around (and that if GMAC was a bank and regulated like a bank, it would be in a world of hurt).
To see this, just think back about a year or two ago about the 0% financing available. The GMAC arm lost money on every sale, but presumably made it up on volume.
Farming, of course, we will always do. We have ridiculous amounts of land in America to use for it. The question there is whether we can make it profitable. Right now, it's about the most subsidized thing around, isn't it?
If we have ridiculous amounts of land, Brazil has insane amounts of land available for farming. Where we get one crop/year, they get 2 or 3. As long as prime farm land goes for $3k/acre here, we will have a hard time competing against 3rd world countries where land sells for pennies an acre and regulations are either nonexistent or easily ignored.
What we need to do in farming is "de-commoditize" our products. This is what the oil industry has successfully done with gasoline - it used to be that gas was gas. Now, they need to produce something on the order of 30 or 40 different blends of gasoline for different areas of the country for different times of the year. They've successfully gone from a commodity product (gasoline) to specialty products (California-Summertime-NOETHANOL-superfuel) and the markets have taken care of rasing prices in response to smaller supplies.
As far as susidies go, farming is not any worse than any other industry - except that they get cash as opposed to help in other ways.
I got that, but if Bob the Accounts Receivable guy goes to some other department, and you hire Jim the New Accounts Receivable guy - wouldn't they be entitled to the same information?
Whenever somebody moves from one department to another, they need either a new PC, new HD, or a fresh setup on their old PC after a secure wipe. Every time somebody leaves the organisation, or a new person arrives.
Are you just making more work for yourself than is required? If you have someone moving from one department to another, would the PC necessarily follow? If not, would the new person taking that person's place not need substantially the same setup as the old person?
I work at a bank and we are not (necessarily) covered by HIPAA. We are, however, covered by GLB. We don't throw away any magnetic media, but I don't replace hard drives when moving workstations around either.
Electronic transactions are growing at an astounding rate (credit/debit card, ACH, that kind of thing). As a matter of fact, electronic transactions (or maybe just debit card transactions - I don't remember off the top of my head right now) outpaced paper checks last year for the first time ever.
I don't think that you'll ever see cash go away. I think that the government would like to do away with it (because of how it can be used in the underground economy), but there is always a place for untraceable transactions - and you don't get that with electronic transfers or plastic.
Also, for those of you looking for stock tips, these guys would not announce this move now unless their earnings report on the 22d is going to be good news.
Or unless they are looking to mitigate bad news...
Personally I've always had a soft spot for $1 coins. Back when the Golden Dollar ones came out I got a few rolls of them and used them at various places, but it looks like they didn't catch on and will eventually go the way of the Susan B. and $2 bill.
I like them too (heck, I like the old $1 coins before the Susan B's - those big old Eisenhower ones - with those coins, you knew you had something worth more than a quarter), but would you really want to use them in place of $1 bills?
If you look in your wallet, most of the bills in there (unless you've recently been to a nudie bar or an ATM or both) are 1's. Now imagine carting around that many coins. That's the problem with $1 coins.
When I was a kid, you saw a lot of denominations you no longer see, even though they're still officially in circulation. I believe this is mainly due to the domination of retail by big chains, which don't like to deal with more denominations than will fit easily in a standard cash register
That might be part of it, but I think that ATMs are more of a direct cause. They typically dispense 20's or 20's and 5's, and because of them, most people don't have to carry around larger denominations when they are going places.
2's (and $1 coins) haven't ever been very "popular" as currency - but are nice for gifts to kids.
If you've ever looked at older currency, it's kind of amazing how much it's changed. I've got a $20 bill from the 1930's. If you look at it, it is a $20 bill. If you place it in a stack of the old style 20's, it sticks out because the green ink was a little different than what was used before the last two redesigns of that denomination.
Nope, it's not un-constitutional at all... it's up to each state to decide how they want to select their electors. Colorado even had a proposition on the ballot to start doing just that... it lost, though.
It's not unconstitutional - just stupid (for a small state) to do. Iowa was split down the middle - 51/49 or so this time, and has 7 electoral votes to give. Proportionally awarding electors would have resulting in a 4/3 split. Chances are that the electoral split would rarely exceed 4/3 either way almost no matter what.
If that was the case, what reason would there be for any candidate to care about Iowa (or any other individual state for that matter). Awarding electoral votes in an all-or-nothing manner makes carrying each individual state more important in each election.
Slashdot Mirror
Which makes it hard to get the lowest bid.
I did take a look at the google sat pictures, and they don't have my hometown in very good resolution, but it is good enough to see my parents' acreage.
Bummer - I misread that. So much for pay attention to slashdot while I should be working.
Change your qmail banner string to read what an exchange server would read - an old, unpatched exchange server - and then watch the consultant's smile disappear after they list all of the vulnerabilities that you've got and you tell them that you were lying.
If they are doing a lot of consulting (and, apparently, recovery), they may find that they can hire an IT guy for what they're paying for consultants.
Animated and singing dancing hamsters on the desktop. Maybe they could take the place of clippy too!
I don't think it will take too much of that kind of segmentation to reduce the size of the garden variety commodity enough to move the price of that commodity.
Which is why I said that if the farmers were able to decommoditize their produce, they would segment the market (and make it less perfectly competitive) and be able to command more pricing power.
We also send lots of food overseas to those areas where people are starving. Part of the problem isn't getting the food (or other aid) to the areas - it's actually getting the food (or other aid) past the corrupt locals and into the hands of those who need it.
From what I understand, GMAC is not run like a bank and doesn't have to defend its loans from examiners like a bank would - and now they are starting to pay the price as their debt is spiraling towards junk status.
As far as the interest goes - that's all well and good as long as they're receiving payments. It doesn't take too much bad debt to cut into that slim margin that you were talking about!
A few years ago, I heard it was the other way around (and that if GMAC was a bank and regulated like a bank, it would be in a world of hurt).
To see this, just think back about a year or two ago about the 0% financing available. The GMAC arm lost money on every sale, but presumably made it up on volume.
If we have ridiculous amounts of land, Brazil has insane amounts of land available for farming. Where we get one crop/year, they get 2 or 3. As long as prime farm land goes for $3k/acre here, we will have a hard time competing against 3rd world countries where land sells for pennies an acre and regulations are either nonexistent or easily ignored.
What we need to do in farming is "de-commoditize" our products. This is what the oil industry has successfully done with gasoline - it used to be that gas was gas. Now, they need to produce something on the order of 30 or 40 different blends of gasoline for different areas of the country for different times of the year. They've successfully gone from a commodity product (gasoline) to specialty products (California-Summertime-NOETHANOL-superfuel) and the markets have taken care of rasing prices in response to smaller supplies.
As far as susidies go, farming is not any worse than any other industry - except that they get cash as opposed to help in other ways.
I got that, but if Bob the Accounts Receivable guy goes to some other department, and you hire Jim the New Accounts Receivable guy - wouldn't they be entitled to the same information?
Are you just making more work for yourself than is required? If you have someone moving from one department to another, would the PC necessarily follow? If not, would the new person taking that person's place not need substantially the same setup as the old person?
I work at a bank and we are not (necessarily) covered by HIPAA. We are, however, covered by GLB. We don't throw away any magnetic media, but I don't replace hard drives when moving workstations around either.
Funny - too bad the government types don't have a sense of humor.
Electronic transactions are growing at an astounding rate (credit/debit card, ACH, that kind of thing). As a matter of fact, electronic transactions (or maybe just debit card transactions - I don't remember off the top of my head right now) outpaced paper checks last year for the first time ever.
I don't think that you'll ever see cash go away. I think that the government would like to do away with it (because of how it can be used in the underground economy), but there is always a place for untraceable transactions - and you don't get that with electronic transfers or plastic.
Or unless they are looking to mitigate bad news...
I like them too (heck, I like the old $1 coins before the Susan B's - those big old Eisenhower ones - with those coins, you knew you had something worth more than a quarter), but would you really want to use them in place of $1 bills?
If you look in your wallet, most of the bills in there (unless you've recently been to a nudie bar or an ATM or both) are 1's. Now imagine carting around that many coins. That's the problem with $1 coins.
That might be part of it, but I think that ATMs are more of a direct cause. They typically dispense 20's or 20's and 5's, and because of them, most people don't have to carry around larger denominations when they are going places.
2's (and $1 coins) haven't ever been very "popular" as currency - but are nice for gifts to kids.
If you've ever looked at older currency, it's kind of amazing how much it's changed. I've got a $20 bill from the 1930's. If you look at it, it is a $20 bill. If you place it in a stack of the old style 20's, it sticks out because the green ink was a little different than what was used before the last two redesigns of that denomination.
No, but it screws up my sleeping patterns for quite a while.
To lose that hour permanently - yuck.
Unless it is a cheap knockoff from Shanghai.
Only if you're buying those Chinese "pirate" cars like Bluicks and Plontiaks, or the ever popular Fjords.
It's not unconstitutional - just stupid (for a small state) to do. Iowa was split down the middle - 51/49 or so this time, and has 7 electoral votes to give. Proportionally awarding electors would have resulting in a 4/3 split. Chances are that the electoral split would rarely exceed 4/3 either way almost no matter what.
If that was the case, what reason would there be for any candidate to care about Iowa (or any other individual state for that matter). Awarding electoral votes in an all-or-nothing manner makes carrying each individual state more important in each election.
I was typing at work so was in the wrong frame of mind.