Define "silenced". If you are talking about Alex Jones, yes YouTube banned him for defaming people and inciting violence but he still has his own websites and can make his own videos. Google is under no obligation to allow him to use their video platform when he has repeatedly broken their rules.
I wouldn't say your first premise is entirely true. Case in point: Beverly Hills, CA is an extremely rich city. The only entity to attempt fiber installation is the city which is building it now. You'd think that of all places, the ISPs would be drooling to install fiber as they could charge almost whatever they wanted. But no.
No we can rebuild the Saturn V. What you're saying is we can't build one easily or cheaply or quickly. Given enough money and time, I guarantee you that NASA could build a Saturn V. But my point is what good would that do for any future space missions? Off the top of my head here are all the major retrofits that a Saturn V will need:
fuel change from liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen, and kerosene to RP-1 and liquid oxygen and all subsystems like fueling ports, etc.
Incorporate modern sensors (and power requirements)
New computerized controls systems
Change overall design from almost non-usable to partially resuable
Replacement of hazardous materials like asbestos
In addition to all that NASA would have to rebuild the factories to make all the original and modified parts.
OR
NASA could design and build a new rocket. In the end this option is cheaper, easier, and faster.
We can build ballistas today and we can rebuild Saturn V rockets if NASA wanted to do so. But NASA doesn't want to do so because rebuilding a Saturn V for today's needs is like restoring a 1964 Ford Mustang and expecting that it meets all current requirements of safety and features. There have been 50 years of development of rocketry since the Saturn V. Replicating one is going backwards. What the mission needs is a rocket with the same capacity as a Saturn V.
What do you mean we "had" the technology 50 years ago? We still have the technology today. What we don't have is the actual vehicles today because NASA doesn't have is enough money to do it in the time span they've been given. Also NASA's budget isn't getting noticeably larger with each passing year.
It is more a poor understanding of nature and evolution. It is in the general interest of all organisms to gather the most resources with the least amount of effort. That being said that principle may not apply to societal interactions of humans.
Are you seriously arguing that Flashâ(TM)s decreased usage over the years had nothing to do with its performance? That it was avoided not because of the constant security holes? Instead youâ(TM)re arguing that Apple did it in with its less than 5% on the computing platform and its minority share on the smartphone market? Thatâ(TM)s laughable at best.
Apple never had Flash on mobile. On the Mac it was terrible; it was just more terrible than the PC version. Flash was never great on any platform. It was tolerated because it was one of the few cross platform technologies at the time. The constant security flaws, the CPU performance was what did it in on all platforms not just Mac.
You make it out like Flash was a paragon of computing before Apple while twirling its moustache decided to kill it off for all computer users everywhere. Flash was terrible. It crashed often. It consumes lots of computing power. It had so many security holes that it seemed like I was patching daily.
Flash however was one of the few cross platform things you could use back in the day. When it worked, it would work roughly the same whether on Windows or Mac. However the death knell wasnâ(TM)t just Apple. Better cross platform technologies like HTML5 is making Flash less relevant.
I would say it was crappier on the Mac platform but it was crappy on any platform including Windows. What drove Apple to move away from it was Adobe not addressing two major issues that Jobs had with it on mobile: stability and battery performance. Apple always said that they would have put Flash on the iPhone if Adobe addressed them but Adobe never did.
Well in 2015, Apple would not have any completed buildings or labs or equipment at Apple Park as their HQ and surrounding land was still under construction. For insurance purposes there is value in these things complete or not. For tax purposes, maybe the value is defaulted to a really low price.
I suspect with Grande, the music companies are probably sending them hundreds if not thousands of notices a day. Grande is a much smaller company than Spectrum or Comcast and donâ(TM)t be have the resources to investigate even a fraction of the claims. The music know this though.
Thereâ(TM)s a huge difference in post processing an image to get better results in things like color balance for example than implying that the camera on the phone took the photo when it didnâ(TM)t. If I remember right MS/Nokia got in trouble because photos and video shot âoefrom the Lumia 920â didnâ(TM)t actually come from the phone but from professional cameras.
So you were there when the Genius looked at my Macs? There weren't following a script. They read the case notes, asked me questions, and seemed to be trying to diagnose the problem. But I suppose it's easier for your narrative if they were following a script. Otherwise you'd have to admit that they know what they are talking about.
From my dealings with the Genius Bar with Macs, they almost always used a terminal window and command lines when looking at things on the computer. They definitely knew their Unix commands.
And do you know for certain? I don't about your tax assessor but where I live, we have to repeal the assessments every year. For example, after the housing bubble burst, my valuation went up by a significant amount.
If we go by your assertion that the valuation is based on the impact of the property to the city with farm land having the least value, what is your valuation on a building under construction? I suppose that if Apple appealed it in 2015, it was for 2014 taxes. In 2014, the building was only 1 year after ground was broke and 3 years before Apple officially moved in.
Again I don't what know exact property is being appealed. For example the assessor thinks the green space in the center of the HQ is worth $1B while Apple disagrees.
If you read the article, Apple didn't say that its HQ was worth $200. From SF Chronicle article:
Some claims reflect extreme differences in estimated values. In one appeal filed in 2015, Apple said that a cluster of properties in and around Apple Park
in Cupertino that the assessor valued at $1 billion was worth just $200. In another, property that the assessor valued at $384 million was, in Appleâ(TM)s view, worth $200, according to an appeal application
What are these properties? I don't know. I'd have to look at the appeal. It could be that the dispute is not over the HQ.
So in your definition of socialism==communism even though they aren't the same thing? For instance, Sweden, Norway, and Finland are definitely socialist countries. I wouldn't call them communist.
But in your listing of deaths due to socialism did you list all the deaths due to capitalism which was my point?
Given this administration, regulation and science seems counter to their ideals. For example, the EPA is considering allowing asbestos on a case by case basis even though its carcinogenic properties are well known. One way suggested is been to re-define what is asbestos to allow certain products.
Slashdot Mirror
Define "silenced". If you are talking about Alex Jones, yes YouTube banned him for defaming people and inciting violence but he still has his own websites and can make his own videos. Google is under no obligation to allow him to use their video platform when he has repeatedly broken their rules.
I wouldn't say your first premise is entirely true. Case in point: Beverly Hills, CA is an extremely rich city. The only entity to attempt fiber installation is the city which is building it now. You'd think that of all places, the ISPs would be drooling to install fiber as they could charge almost whatever they wanted. But no.
No we can rebuild the Saturn V. What you're saying is we can't build one easily or cheaply or quickly. Given enough money and time, I guarantee you that NASA could build a Saturn V. But my point is what good would that do for any future space missions? Off the top of my head here are all the major retrofits that a Saturn V will need:
In addition to all that NASA would have to rebuild the factories to make all the original and modified parts.
OR
NASA could design and build a new rocket. In the end this option is cheaper, easier, and faster.
We can build ballistas today and we can rebuild Saturn V rockets if NASA wanted to do so. But NASA doesn't want to do so because rebuilding a Saturn V for today's needs is like restoring a 1964 Ford Mustang and expecting that it meets all current requirements of safety and features. There have been 50 years of development of rocketry since the Saturn V. Replicating one is going backwards. What the mission needs is a rocket with the same capacity as a Saturn V.
What do you mean we "had" the technology 50 years ago? We still have the technology today. What we don't have is the actual vehicles today because NASA doesn't have is enough money to do it in the time span they've been given. Also NASA's budget isn't getting noticeably larger with each passing year.
It is more a poor understanding of nature and evolution. It is in the general interest of all organisms to gather the most resources with the least amount of effort. That being said that principle may not apply to societal interactions of humans.
Are you seriously arguing that Flashâ(TM)s decreased usage over the years had nothing to do with its performance? That it was avoided not because of the constant security holes? Instead youâ(TM)re arguing that Apple did it in with its less than 5% on the computing platform and its minority share on the smartphone market? Thatâ(TM)s laughable at best.
Apple never had Flash on mobile. On the Mac it was terrible; it was just more terrible than the PC version. Flash was never great on any platform. It was tolerated because it was one of the few cross platform technologies at the time. The constant security flaws, the CPU performance was what did it in on all platforms not just Mac.
You make it out like Flash was a paragon of computing before Apple while twirling its moustache decided to kill it off for all computer users everywhere. Flash was terrible. It crashed often. It consumes lots of computing power. It had so many security holes that it seemed like I was patching daily.
Flash however was one of the few cross platform things you could use back in the day. When it worked, it would work roughly the same whether on Windows or Mac. However the death knell wasnâ(TM)t just Apple. Better cross platform technologies like HTML5 is making Flash less relevant.
I would say it was crappier on the Mac platform but it was crappy on any platform including Windows. What drove Apple to move away from it was Adobe not addressing two major issues that Jobs had with it on mobile: stability and battery performance. Apple always said that they would have put Flash on the iPhone if Adobe addressed them but Adobe never did.
Well in 2015, Apple would not have any completed buildings or labs or equipment at Apple Park as their HQ and surrounding land was still under construction. For insurance purposes there is value in these things complete or not. For tax purposes, maybe the value is defaulted to a really low price.
I suspect with Grande, the music companies are probably sending them hundreds if not thousands of notices a day. Grande is a much smaller company than Spectrum or Comcast and donâ(TM)t be have the resources to investigate even a fraction of the claims. The music know this though.
Microsoft got caught because you could see in the commercial a reflection where a professional video camera rig was used.
Thereâ(TM)s a huge difference in post processing an image to get better results in things like color balance for example than implying that the camera on the phone took the photo when it didnâ(TM)t. If I remember right MS/Nokia got in trouble because photos and video shot âoefrom the Lumia 920â didnâ(TM)t actually come from the phone but from professional cameras.
. . . When you do that, the Android economy dwarfs Apple. . . instead of being hogged by one successful (for now) monopolist.
I do not think that word means what you think it means basing on the rest of your paragraph. In essence youâ(TM)ve debunked yourself.
So you were there when the Genius looked at my Macs? There weren't following a script. They read the case notes, asked me questions, and seemed to be trying to diagnose the problem. But I suppose it's easier for your narrative if they were following a script. Otherwise you'd have to admit that they know what they are talking about.
From my dealings with the Genius Bar with Macs, they almost always used a terminal window and command lines when looking at things on the computer. They definitely knew their Unix commands.
And do you know for certain? I don't about your tax assessor but where I live, we have to repeal the assessments every year. For example, after the housing bubble burst, my valuation went up by a significant amount.
If we go by your assertion that the valuation is based on the impact of the property to the city with farm land having the least value, what is your valuation on a building under construction? I suppose that if Apple appealed it in 2015, it was for 2014 taxes. In 2014, the building was only 1 year after ground was broke and 3 years before Apple officially moved in.
Again I don't what know exact property is being appealed. For example the assessor thinks the green space in the center of the HQ is worth $1B while Apple disagrees.
If you read the article, Apple didn't say that its HQ was worth $200. From SF Chronicle article:
Some claims reflect extreme differences in estimated values. In one appeal filed in 2015, Apple said that a cluster of properties in and around Apple Park
in Cupertino that the assessor valued at $1 billion was worth just $200. In another, property that the assessor valued at $384 million was, in Appleâ(TM)s view, worth $200, according to an appeal application
What are these properties? I don't know. I'd have to look at the appeal. It could be that the dispute is not over the HQ.
Shhhh. It's a secret to keep those dirty Americans from moving to Europe.
"Socialism is terrible. Nothing to see here. Move along. These aren't the droids you are looking for."
So in your definition of socialism==communism even though they aren't the same thing? For instance, Sweden, Norway, and Finland are definitely socialist countries. I wouldn't call them communist.
But in your listing of deaths due to socialism did you list all the deaths due to capitalism which was my point?
Given this administration, regulation and science seems counter to their ideals. For example, the EPA is considering allowing asbestos on a case by case basis even though its carcinogenic properties are well known. One way suggested is been to re-define what is asbestos to allow certain products.
In your version of history did you fail to include all the people that died due to capitalism as well? Also what is your definition of socialism?