Depreciate a section 179 expense? Are ye Daft man?
You would be surprised what you can legally deduct as a job related expense. And yes, reduction of taxable income can amount to free, or nearly so, depending on your other deductions.
You may not get a bigger refund, but you can certainly get an iPhone for free if you can write it off for your work. As for the price, at $199 its as cheap as many of the other suggestions posted in this thread.
Its less than the much ballyhooed N810, but because it is a phone you actually can use it for more than a single purpose.
The tax write off is just what the Doctor ordered for your portion of the Stimulus.
iPhone or iPod touch, assuming what you want to access is browser based. Low price? Not so much, but if you have one anyway... Or were looking for a tax write off this might be the way to go.
> Actually, that's the whole issue. NRK is taxpayer funded so there are no fees or ads to begin with.
So making it available for free to the people who already paid for it suddenly now gains the universal applause here on SlashDot? Look, they have an obligation to give it away!
They produced it woth other people's money. Now they plan using other people's money in the form of hard drives and band width to distribute it. Not so altruistic when you look at in in that light is it?
Look, its government funded pablum! Perhaps even good quality pablum, but pablum none the less. How much is that worth anyway? Is there a check box on Norwegian tax forms asking if tax payers want to contribute to NRK? No? Thought not.
The problem with socialism, is sooner or later you run out of other people's money. (Thatcher).
No, people who have conversations with themselves do not "tend to behave unpredictably".
I cry foul for your dredging up the most sensational episode you can find as justification for fearing any slightly different behavior. Especially when there was no indication of the behavior in question:
Quote: "I never took the time to know him, but he seemed to be OK, right, just a kid," said Olmstead, a Nova Scotia man who had been taking the bus from Alberta to Montreal."
I cry GREATER Foul for your posting a link that that immediately triggered my virus scanner.
The new reality is better for everybody. It provides a modicum of dignity for the disturbed, or the merely "different", and reduces the irrational fears of everyone else.
Verizon believes that before a company captures certain Internet-usage data for targeted or customized advertising purposes, it should obtain meaningful, affirmative consent from consumers." To get that meaningful consent, Tauke said, requires a) explaining to consumers exactly what kind of data are being collected and for what; b) treating a failure to consent as meaning no collection of data for "online behavioral marketing"; and c) consumers' ability to easily opt out if they initially agree but change their minds.
The people walking down the street talking via bluetooth seem odd to you because they prefer the conversation with a distant person to dealing with you. If your need for attention weren't so acute this wouldn't bother you at all.
A connected world is the cure for the provincialism and prejudice of place. Global personal communications have been a goal of and a prerequisite for peaceful co-existence of differing cultures since the Pleistocene, and when we have nearly achieved it, we get sniping from the perpetually miffed. It hardly seems fair.
The proposed solution in TFA is just one brief pit stop on the road to cerebral control of devices. Calm down. Whether or not it is clear to your the universe is unfolding as it should.
> This is not Orwellian. The Brit ish government have not set out to control the populace, > that will just be a purely unintentional side-effect.
Rubbish. You've got it precisely the wrong way around.
The government is encouraging the tabloids as excuse and cover to carry out this policy of "total situational awareness".
The government and British establishment are so terrified that all those vague promises of British citizenship and rights of travel made to the conquered peoples of the long collapsed empire have started to darken the pasty white Britain and they have a long running policy to do something about it.
Its as simple as that.
Of course no one pointed out till it was too late that Mr. Average Britain would also be caught in this web of cameras and spying.
I suppose next you will post the propaganda links about how popular these cameras are, and how the stooges always show up at the council meetings to lobby for more.
To turn around and blame this on the tabloids is laughable. You're a great apologist, but not much of a clear thinker.
Slashdot Mirror
Depreciate a section 179 expense? Are ye Daft man?
You would be surprised what you can legally deduct as a job related expense.
And yes, reduction of taxable income can amount to free, or nearly so, depending
on your other deductions.
As a government funded institution, NRK is tasked with giving away
their programming. Its in their mandate. Its what they do.
We are not discussing the BBC here.
They didn't look cheaper when I priced them.
iPhones in the US cost $199.
iPod Touch can be had for $175.
N810 goes for 260 or better.
How is this cheaper?
Same company.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=VZ
Really, I can't believe you were unaware of this!!
You may not get a bigger refund, but you can certainly get an iPhone for free if you can write it off for your work. As for the price, at $199 its as cheap as many of the other suggestions posted in this thread.
Its less than the much ballyhooed N810, but because it is a phone you actually can use it for more than a single purpose.
The tax write off is just what the Doctor ordered for your portion of the Stimulus.
> Nokia devices aren't well known or used by many people.
Niche. Simple one word description.
You really think there is a difference?
What make believe world do you live in?
iPhone or iPod touch, assuming what you want to access is browser based.
Low price? Not so much, but if you have one anyway... Or were looking for a tax write off this might be the way to go.
> government in this case is actually using taxpayer money responsibly.
Ok. Sorry.
Didn't realize it was the government's job to entertain you.
Q: How many bones are in the human body
A: Did you mean cumulatively or at any point in time?
> gain lots of respect, viewers, and money.
This presumes its worth watching in the first place.
As for the "Money" bit, you do realized this is a fully government funded organization don't you?
> Actually, that's the whole issue. NRK is taxpayer funded so there are no fees or ads to begin with.
So making it available for free to the people who already paid for it suddenly now gains the universal applause here on SlashDot? Look, they have an obligation to give it away!
They produced it woth other people's money. Now they plan using other people's money in the form of hard drives and band width to distribute it. Not so altruistic when you look at in in that light is it?
Look, its government funded pablum! Perhaps even good quality pablum, but pablum none the less. How much is that worth anyway? Is there a check box on Norwegian tax forms asking if tax payers want to contribute to NRK? No? Thought not.
The problem with socialism, is sooner or later you run out of other people's money. (Thatcher).
By what stretch of the imagination do they gain control of it?
Do they really think it can't be re-seeded and tracked by other trackers?
Really indeed!!?
I've never known Best Buy to beat Circuit City's price on anything of value.
Its always been known as "NOT THE Best Buy" around here.
No, people who have conversations with themselves do not "tend to behave unpredictably".
I cry foul for your dredging up the most sensational episode you can find as justification for fearing any slightly different behavior. Especially when there was no indication of the behavior in question:
Quote: "I never took the time to know him, but he seemed to be OK, right, just a kid," said Olmstead, a Nova Scotia man who had been taking the bus from Alberta to Montreal."
I cry GREATER Foul for your posting a link that that immediately triggered my virus scanner.
I understood that. No need to explain.
The new reality is better for everybody. It provides a modicum of dignity for the disturbed, or the merely "different", and reduces the irrational fears of everyone else.
So they apparently lied to congress:
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ISPs-Try-To-Prevent-New-Opt-In-Only-Privacy-Law-97991
Verizon statement before Congress:
Verizon believes that before a company captures certain Internet-usage data for targeted or customized advertising purposes, it should obtain meaningful, affirmative consent from consumers." To get that meaningful consent, Tauke said, requires a) explaining to consumers exactly what kind of data are being collected and for what; b) treating a failure to consent as meaning no collection of data for "online behavioral marketing"; and c) consumers' ability to easily opt out if they initially agree but change their minds.
I shocked. Shocked! I tell you...
The talkers (crazy or bluetooth) do not present a risk to you.
Why so paranoid? If you leave BOTH groups alone there is not a problem.
> if you have a maid/servant it's ok if they are ill for a couple of days,
Good example! That ought to represent about .000002% of all slashdotters.
The people walking down the street talking via bluetooth seem odd to you because they prefer the conversation with a distant person to dealing with you. If your need for attention weren't so acute this wouldn't bother you at all.
A connected world is the cure for the provincialism and prejudice of place. Global personal communications have been a goal of and a prerequisite for peaceful co-existence of differing cultures since the Pleistocene, and when we have nearly achieved it, we get sniping from the perpetually miffed. It hardly seems fair.
The proposed solution in TFA is just one brief pit stop on the road to cerebral control of devices. Calm down. Whether or not it is clear to your the universe is unfolding as it should.
Don't bee so quick to breath that sigh of relief.
This measure was merely to legitimize what is already taking place.
It's demise raises no impediment.
> This is not Orwellian. The Brit
ish government have not set out to control the populace,
> that will just be a purely unintentional side-effect.
Rubbish.
You've got it precisely the wrong way around.
The government is encouraging the tabloids as excuse and cover to carry out
this policy of "total situational awareness".
The government and British establishment are so terrified that all
those vague promises of British citizenship and rights of travel made to the
conquered peoples of the long collapsed empire have started to darken the pasty white
Britain and they have a long running policy to do something about it.
Its as simple as that.
Of course no one pointed out till it was too late that Mr. Average Britain
would also be caught in this web of cameras and spying.
I suppose next you will post the propaganda links about how popular these
cameras are, and how the stooges always show up at the council meetings to
lobby for more.
To turn around and blame this on the tabloids is laughable. You're a great
apologist, but not much of a clear thinker.
> I think I'm jealous. It seems that their signal-to-noise ratio (for this article, at least) is no worse than Slashdot's.
Speaking of signal to noise ratio!!
You quote this huge long excerpt for a one line (content less) drive by sniping?
What the hell were you thinking?
>You can definetly move a prosthetic eye,
Apparently not well enough for touch typing...
Mod parent up.