What if I setup a private VPN tunnel or private connection to send mail between my private mail server and that of my friend or a private organization, company?
My theory is that Apple lost because Windows had more apps. While, I use Windows and Linux, Windows has more apps than Linux in the desktop environment.
When it came to supporting more hardware, making development easier, having better APIs/docs, being more open, supporting 3rd party devices, being more cost affective, having more choices and soon on is how Windows won the race to get the most applications. Which in turn is why it won the war for desktop market share.
But those are the very reasons that I am predicting that Android will dominate shortly in the PDA/mobile market. It supports more hardware, it makes development easier, it makes licensing easier, it supports more 3rd party devices, it is more cost effective, it offers more choices and so on. Apple is in the lead today, just like the Apple ][ was in the lead in the earlier 80s and lost so to will the iPhone. Sure it will be cool and trendy, but it will not be the market leader.
Just like their closed minded ways hurt them eventually in the desktop space, so will it hurt them in the mobile space. Now there are things they could start soon to fend off the threat, for instance they could invest time in allowing development from just Intel based Macs to various OSes, like Windows and Linux as well. They could try to expand to additional carriers when the AT&T exclusive offer period ends, they could open up and allow programs to run background services, widgets, run-time environments, emulators and whatnot. They could work to expand 3rd party device support, etc. But that is not who Apple is, they are little fascists who need to control everything, the benefit is that there is less to break or go wrong with products, but for me, I prefer freedom to safety any day, so cannot see the iPhone winning in the long run, but perhaps more people prefer to give up freedom these days for things to just work and I am completely wrong. Time will decide, not a/. flame war.
If I write iApp and you write iApp, my official name will be iApp.mydomain.com and yours will be iApp.yourdomain.com
You could even let apps default to root domain so you could install the twitter.com or cnn.com apps.
In terms of people/companies trying to use same basic name, it would allow it, but if a copyright or trademark is held then that could be used to prevent copycat or fakes from the market place. Plus since it is domain based it allows people to know who actually owns the domain and thus application should there be a problem.
Now because this is relatively simple and straight forward, easily solves the problem, but lacks... "style" and more importantly doesn't make Apple any additional revenue, I do not expect them to sign off on such a solution. Rather I expect them to impose some sort of filtering or fee based solution instead.
Now since Google Android is open and evolving faster then iPhone, it may be a better fit for them.
RANT
I believe we will see the iPhone relegated to a small fringe market share of mobile device after it's initial success. With it loosing out to the more open and hardware agnostic Android OS, similar to the sliver OS X holds after losing to Windows for the exact same reasons. Just like how Windows had more Apps, so to will Android. With Android I can do crazy things like program it on Mac, Windows or Linux PC. With Android I can do crazy things like write tether apps, release or install apps outside of market, and allow them run in background or as service. I can even write emulators, run-time environments, etc. By end of year their will be an Android device for all major carriers as it is carrier agnostic, hardware agnostic, IDE agnostic, base computer agnostic, etc.
I find it absolutely amazing that the posts so far include comments like:
Can't they just read the odometer?
Can't they just increase the gasoline tax?
I find this amazing, where are all the individual thinkers?
Has the US public school system so corrupted our understanding of government that nobody on/. thinks "Wait the politicians work for us and the government should not increase our tax burden when I am already hurting financially and the government is currently wasting so much of its resources."
Where are the patriots that say "Perhaps increasing taxes on Americans right now is a bad idea in terms of economic policy and individual liberty?", who think "Why are we all supposed to work for the American dream of become something great or someone successful only to discover our reward is a higher tax burden? Why are we taxing success?"
Where are those who are opposed to the patriot act? So you believe it is wrong for the government to listen to your phone calls, but you have no problem with them tracking your vehicles location with a remote GPS monitoring device? Are the chains any less effective if they are invisible and electronic then they would be if they were cold and steal? Government has no right to know this private information.
Where is the/er that suggests the federal government gets out of the highway/road funding business, lowers citizen taxes and lets states decide how to handle it? Why should a man in Florida pay for a bridge in Alaska? Why should a man in Alabama fund a highway in CA?
Are we so lost from the ideas of the founders that we just lie down and submit to excessive taxation these days?
Would you prefer to have no option and simply die or the option pay and be saved?
You seem to advocate the position to pay indirectly (i.e. via high taxes or somebody else's wallet).
Understand that any government that can save your life, can take it away.
In short you prefer to surrender your rights for security (which, will leave you with neither). I prefer to have liberty and be responsible for myself and my family.
Why must you take our people's hard earned money? Why don't you pay for your BS and leave me alone?
National health care is unconstitutional so it cannot be done without an amendment, because the 10th amendment leaves this right to the states. So a state like MA can socialize health care and states like TX may not.
The beauty of the Constitutional framework is that you can live in a state that supports your values (a nanny state), while I can live in a state the supports mine (limited government with low taxes).
How would you feel if you were drowning in the lake and there was a line to use the flotation device? See France, UK and Canadian solutions.
How would you feel if you were drowning in the lake and the government didn't toss you a flotation device you payed for because they gave it to somebody else instead? Read the current draft bill.
How would you feel if you were standing on the side of the lake, saw somebody in trouble, but when you went to save them a government panel intervened and prevented you from getting in the water, because the only approved treatments are 1). boat rescue or 2). certified swimmer? Read the current draft bill.
How would you feel if your parents or kids were drowning and the government told the people on the side on to not go and save them, because they were to remain ready to save people between the ages of 15-50 and not to bother with the young or the old. Read the current draft bill.
How would you feel if you being a great swimmer were comfortable taking a chance in the lake, but the government required you either pay for a private life guard, rent the government life guard or pay a tax equal to 2.5% of your salary (unless you are "an illegal resident", cannot make this up, it is in the bill). And then after 5 years your employer will have to pay a 8% fine if you use a private life guard instead of a government life guard. Read the current draft bill.
It's not globalization that is killing CA, it is two simple things.
Taxes are to high.
Environmental obstructions have CA behind 8 ball when it comes to enough reliable power.
CA's loss is Seattle's and Austin's gain. Why would you start a company in CA and have to pay so much in taxes and worry about reliable power and whatnot, when you could instead be in WA or TX with no state income tax?
CA doesn't have a lock on smart tech people, plus the longer CA allows problems to exist, the more those great programmers, investors, system admins, network engineers and whatnot are dispersing to other parts of the country.
Silicon Valley in CA? No thanks, I will take Silicon Hills in Austin, TX, because I make the same pay, but in Austin I get to keep more of it.
Why in the world does the data center have to be next door to you?
With tools like VPN, HP's ILO, Dell's DRAC, and countless other hardware management console ports, serial to Ethernet switches, KVM to VNC or whatever else, it's really easy to rarely if ever see the "hardware".
I mean come on, we're "slash dot", if we cannot install Linux, change the configuration in IOS, or patch/reboot Windows from 400+ miles away, we may have to change our name to "wiener dot".
One would think the SSN could serve as a unique identifier.
And our non-representative representatives in Congress wonder why so many people don't trust them to run the healthcare system.
I can see it now
We're sorry Matt Hew Johnson, we accidentally removed your leg as per operation instructions intended for Matthew Johnson down the hall. Now I know you think you got the bad end of the deal. I mean you loosing your leg and him getting the heart transplant you expected, but before you start complaining, recognize, you are B+ and he is type A-. Poor bastard will be lucky if he makes it through the night, which means your likely to get double breakfast tomorrow courtesy of Uncle Sammy. That should cheer you up, gimpy. Well, I would love to stay and chat, but union regs say I get to take a 30 minute break every half hour.
The Soviets used robotics to explore moon, so you did not need humans as far back as the early 70s.
Your flawed assumption fails to take into account the great advancement by sending a person, aka the coolness factor. Sending robots or whatever to wherever is not challenging enough. It lacks adventure and risk that pushes adventurer/explorer in humans.
Why leave your house, why not just sit in your house, make money programming remotely, order pizza and groceries? Because seeing a picture of a flower is not the same as seeing a flower, touching it and not to mention the unexpected, like running across a bee or humming bird.
To remove the adventure/explorer/risk aspect of space exploration makes not sense to me.
Finally having somebody from Japan, America and Russia walk on Mars is more of a bonding experience then landing a droid built in those various countries on Mars.
I guess my point is only people who lack vision, guts and balls only want to use robots.
I would much rather see international collaboration to develop technology that mitigates the effectiveness and deadliness of nuclear weapons.
So why is Obama entertaining the idea that the US may stop or delay missile defense systems? Shouldn't we be investing more, not less into defensive solutions?
I honestly believe the size of our national debt and our federal governments spending habits will do more damage to the US economy and quality of life for citizens than 12 nuclear warheads could do.
you've got a long way to go before you can start preaching to countries with a dozen or nuclear weapons about the need for restraint.
If we have little or no nukes left, why would the listen?
I find it odd that people have a problem with the United States having weapons of mass destruction. Given that we have been in the Korean war, the Vietnam War, two Gulf wars and countless military operations without using them.
The fact that we were willing to settle on a stalemate in Korea and actually lost Vietnam, yet had enough restraint to not use our arsenal demonstrates we have control and restraint (Hence we have earned the right to preach).
The same cannot be said for North Korea (who does not have sufficient working nukes), yet has fired missiles and tested nukes whenever it wants something from the world (if only to be paid attention to) or Iran (which is not there yet) but has proclaimed they would use them as soon as they get them on Israel (Doesn't show much control, regard for life, regard for environment or understanding).
Furthermore, a Republic or a Democracy is naturally more restrained or at least slower to act (if for no other reason then the required public debate cycles) then a dictatorship or oligarchy.
Listen I am going to drop a huge bombshell on how GS makes their money and it has nothing to do with source code or trading. Ready?
Step 1: Buy Republicans Step 2: Hedge investment and buy Democrats Step 3: Create illusion that there is a difference between above to avoid discovery that you own both. Get people to vote for their party each election, one thing you don't want is for people catch on and vote against all incumbents which you are heavily invested into and who have been there long enough to feel comfortable bending rules or outright breaking law. Step 4: Make money trading stocks, bonds and commodities using leverage from 1,2,3 and 5. Step 5: If nobody to buy, have former GS executives run. See Corzine - D - NJ Governor and Paulson - R - Former Treasury Secretary. Step 6: If GS fails to make money on step 4, get politicians to bail you out indirectly to avoid blame. For example get them to bailout your failing investment AIG, then have AIG kick you back the $20 billion you gave them. Sure take direct bailout money, but give it back should public try to regulate GS salaries or demand transparency. Step 7: Act like you are better at making money because you are really really smart and it has nothing to do with the fact that you are in a position to change the rules. Look down on little people and small businesses trying to compete while playing by rules. Step 8: As if making money trading actual items by influencing markets/politicians isn't profitable enough, kick it up a notch and make money trading... wait for it... nothing. Call it Cap 'n Trade, make people think it will help environment, knowing that in truth it will not cut back on global pollution, that it will ship manufacturing to other countries along with jobs. Tell people it doesn't tax them and will create jobs (I mean with all the money GS execs will be making they can higher more gophers to get them coffee and they will be going out in NYC to eat expensive meals and that will employ aspiring actors... I mean waiters). Don't tax/charge people directly just tax companies, services and products the people cannot do without. When prices go up on those things blame the very companies that GS and US federal government are robbing with a pen (guns are so small time) and say it is their... wait for it... "selfish greed". Have system in place so the shares of nothing you are trading become more and more rare over time to ensure you get larger and larger pay outs and hope US public is to stupid to vote out every paid politician you had in your pocket to vote for it. Rememeber avoid and deflect, blame the other side. Step 9: If questioned or called out, act as if there is no way the person pointing out truth could possibly understand the complexities of the system and therefore and unqualified to comment. If person is in energy production label them greedy capitalistic ways". If somebody from any other sector of economy comes forward to detail insanity of scam, I mean legislation, label them a racist or proclaim they don't care about... wait for it... "the children". If person is using slashdot then mod them -1 TROLL. Step 10: Goto Step 1.
I find it interesting and scary that in a story about using GPS to apply vehicle taxes, most posts are suggesting alternative forms of taxation.
"Just raise the gasoline tax"
"Tax based on the odometer reading."
Why isn't anybody posting a more sensible alternative? "Government shouldn't raise our taxes while we are hurting and must spend within it's means."
Governments should spend within their means just like people who bought too much home or ran up large credit card balances or have taken an income hit are now learning to live within their means. Citizens are having to seriously cut back on expenses and for the first time in decades are starting to save money and/or pay down debt.
So why shouldn't we demand that our government do the same?" In CA the government said "we will cut some spending, but we also want to raise your taxes as well." The people in CA said "No, stop raising taxes, focus on cutting more spending." The CA government and the Federal government aren't getting it, yet. However, we have to stand tall and tell our local, state and federal governments to not tax us anymore, to stop borrowing and to spend less.
If they are getting less tax revenue because people have lost their jobs or are trying to pay down debt, how does it seem sensible to anybody on/. that government be allowed to raise taxes on those very people?
If you are unemployed (or retired living on a fixed income) right now, does it make sense for the government to increase the cost of electricity, heating oil and gasoline on you right now? If you are trying to pay down your student loans or car loan or credit card debt, does it make sense for government to take more of your income and impede your efforts? If you are trying to sell you house, does it make sense for the government to increase taxes and in the process reduce the number of potential buyers with enough remaining income to afford your house?"
THE SOLUTION IS TO FIGHT ALL INCREASED TAX INCREASES AND VOTE OUT SUPPORTERS OF THEM REGARDLESS OF PARTY.
They already do write down the mileage when you get the emissions checked.
I find it funny that you have posted an answer on/. that applies to your state when there are readers from 49 other states and the rest of the world, to which what you say may not be true. For example, I don't have to submit to an emissions test where I live.
Raising the gas tax is far cheaper, impossible to turn into Big Brother, and localizes the the state and community pretty well, on average.
And not raising the federal gas tax and having having the Senate kill Cap and Trade will be even cheaper still and allows state and local governments to decide how to handle the situation. It should be common sense that the closer the government is to the people the more respectful of the people's needs it will be, which is they Americans should support stronger state governments and a weaker central government. Unfortunately while it should be common sense, it is not.
I agree the Sony MP3 players are much better in terms of features like FM radio, bluetooth headphone support, easy to upload and change music as well as use to store other files like your resume. It is also cheaper for the size of storage and options you get.
Re:Android just won't catch up with iPhone
on
Unlocking Android
·
· Score: 1
The iPhone is winning on the basis of having a much superior interface
Here is the best AD for Android, you run it the end of this year or early 2010.
You have a cut of the Apple conference where they show how many apps they have compared to other phones with the date. - Advantage iPhone
Then you show the current apps between Android and the iPhone with trend lines and the date Android will pass the iPhone sometime next year. - Advantage Android
Then you show apps that Apple has banned but are available for Android, starting with wifi tethering that allows you to connect multiple Windows, Linux and OS X machines to your service providers network, etc. - Advantage Android
Then you run the number of iPhone models available versus the number of Android phones available. Phones with keyboards or without keyboards, phones from HTC, motorola and Samsung (all will have phones by the end of 2009). - Advantage Android
Then you show how iPhone only works on AT&T and how Android works on T-Mobile or AT&T and probably other providers by the end of year. - Advantage Android
So you basically say, do you want the most censored apps you can play in the foreground right now? Apps that are policed by Apple and AT&T?
Or do you want the phone what has the most apps by end of 2010, is open, with advanced apps, background services and alerts, etc. with more choices on service providers and hardware manufactures?
Do you want a phone that you can hack and customize endlessly, a phone you can tweak infinitely and even code for yourself or your friends?
In short do you want to feel cool, or do you want to be free (which is what makes most people cool)?
I don't think you understand freedom and liberty. In a free society, taxes should not be use to curb or alter behavior. I see no difference between using a gun or using a tax to force a person to do something they otherwise would not do.
I believe that taxes have one single purpose. To fund the government. Therefore I believe it is immoral and wrong to tax things differently in an attempt to alter an individual's behavior. Why should the tax on alcohol be hirer then the tax on say a video game or a movie ticket? Why should gasoline be taxed at a different rate then milk? Taxes should be clearly identified (which is not the case with gasoline, where government makes a larger profit then the oil companies already).
Taxes should not be used as a subversive method to influence free choices.
Furthermore, your argument suggests if you tax something, you get less of it, or rather people buy/use less of it. Which is true, so why are we taxing income and savings? If the government taxes income, it stands to reason people will work less? So if the government and you and I all believe taxing "bad things" like gas and booze reduces consumption, why are we taxing "positive things" like income and talking about taxing "helpful things" like health benefits?
In a free society, neither the gun nor taxes should be used against people to restrict their choices. So I say let's toss IRS tax code out and abolish the 16th amendment and replace it with an amendment that says the federal government can only tax a standard % at the retail level that is the same on whatever you buy, wherever you buy it (we don't want o discriminate certain items/products or places. Discrimination is wrong). Be it diapers or a Lexus. If you buy more expensive things you pay more taxes, so have no fear the rich in this case will continue to pay a larger share.
Finally it rewards savings (the lack of savings and the spending of more then we made is what caused recession). It was greed from the individual level to the corporate level to the government level that is now requiring a correction. Many Americans are getting it and correcting the problems that lead us to where we are. Many businesses and people have changed their behavior and spending and/or are now saving more and paying down debt. It is the government that has actually increased the amount of money it spends. It is the government that has not learned or understood. It is the government that is on the wrong side of historical and financial truths.
If Americans pay down debt, drive less and do other things because they believe it is the best plan for protecting their well being that is great. But the government is telling us conflicting lies and saying we should go out and spend, first Bush did it after 9/11 and the Republicans cheered and the Democrats booed. Now Obama says "Go out and spend, things are starting to turn around" (which is BS), and the Dems cheer and the GOP boos and I am one of maybe 3 people on/. going "WTF?".
Your suggestion to tax gasoline to change human behavior is in conflict with a free society. In a free society, you don't need to worry about what other people do. If you want to drive less to save yourself some money or to help keep the Earth clean, well then right on, do it. Don't worry about others, many will do what you are doing, many will not. All you need to do is not threaten their freedom with taxes or a gun.
Are all loans repaid? No, well then it puts tax payers at risk. Also winners are picked by those the government funds, can you get a government loan for a green energy idea you have? No, you aren't "big" enough, you aren't "connected" enough, you haven't given enough money to one or both parties. This model is unjust and puts tax payers at risk without their approval, why not let Americans vote on what projects to fund? If Tesla was a good investment, why couldn't they get enough funding from private investors to not require government backing? Don't you think now that the government has backed Tesla it could be motivated to pressure or push against rivals should they appear?
If you are against the model I posted earlier, that means you are against the X Prize and Google models of funding innovation.
People who claim that Obama or the American Democratic party for that matter is socialist needs to take a trip around the globe.
I think you need to take a trip around the globe, or at the very least read more about what others in the world are saying about Obama.
"Hey, Obama has just nationalized nothing more and nothing less than General Motors. Comrade Obama! Fidel, careful or we are going to end up to his right," Chavez joked on a live television broadcast.
"The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe." - Russian Pravda
China has twice criticized us for our spending and money printing.
Sweden called for Obama to slow down and said his movement on GM was two socialist.
It's not that you don't know anything, it is just that you know so much that isn't true.
Slashdot Mirror
What if I setup a private VPN tunnel or private connection to send mail between my private mail server and that of my friend or a private organization, company?
My theory is that Apple lost because Windows had more apps. While, I use Windows and Linux, Windows has more apps than Linux in the desktop environment.
/. flame war.
When it came to supporting more hardware, making development easier, having better APIs/docs, being more open, supporting 3rd party devices, being more cost affective, having more choices and soon on is how Windows won the race to get the most applications. Which in turn is why it won the war for desktop market share.
But those are the very reasons that I am predicting that Android will dominate shortly in the PDA/mobile market. It supports more hardware, it makes development easier, it makes licensing easier, it supports more 3rd party devices, it is more cost effective, it offers more choices and so on. Apple is in the lead today, just like the Apple ][ was in the lead in the earlier 80s and lost so to will the iPhone. Sure it will be cool and trendy, but it will not be the market leader.
Just like their closed minded ways hurt them eventually in the desktop space, so will it hurt them in the mobile space. Now there are things they could start soon to fend off the threat, for instance they could invest time in allowing development from just Intel based Macs to various OSes, like Windows and Linux as well. They could try to expand to additional carriers when the AT&T exclusive offer period ends, they could open up and allow programs to run background services, widgets, run-time environments, emulators and whatnot. They could work to expand 3rd party device support, etc. But that is not who Apple is, they are little fascists who need to control everything, the benefit is that there is less to break or go wrong with products, but for me, I prefer freedom to safety any day, so cannot see the iPhone winning in the long run, but perhaps more people prefer to give up freedom these days for things to just work and I am completely wrong. Time will decide, not a
Solves everything.
... "style" and more importantly doesn't make Apple any additional revenue, I do not expect them to sign off on such a solution. Rather I expect them to impose some sort of filtering or fee based solution instead.
If I write iApp and you write iApp, my official name will be iApp.mydomain.com and yours will be iApp.yourdomain.com
You could even let apps default to root domain so you could install the twitter.com or cnn.com apps.
In terms of people/companies trying to use same basic name, it would allow it, but if a copyright or trademark is held then that could be used to prevent copycat or fakes from the market place. Plus since it is domain based it allows people to know who actually owns the domain and thus application should there be a problem.
Now because this is relatively simple and straight forward, easily solves the problem, but lacks
Now since Google Android is open and evolving faster then iPhone, it may be a better fit for them.
RANT
I believe we will see the iPhone relegated to a small fringe market share of mobile device after it's initial success. With it loosing out to the more open and hardware agnostic Android OS, similar to the sliver OS X holds after losing to Windows for the exact same reasons. Just like how Windows had more Apps, so to will Android. With Android I can do crazy things like program it on Mac, Windows or Linux PC. With Android I can do crazy things like write tether apps, release or install apps outside of market, and allow them run in background or as service. I can even write emulators, run-time environments, etc. By end of year their will be an Android device for all major carriers as it is carrier agnostic, hardware agnostic, IDE agnostic, base computer agnostic, etc.
/RANT
I find this amazing, where are all the individual thinkers?
/. thinks "Wait the politicians work for us and the government should not increase our tax burden when I am already hurting financially and the government is currently wasting so much of its resources."
/er that suggests the federal government gets out of the highway/road funding business, lowers citizen taxes and lets states decide how to handle it? Why should a man in Florida pay for a bridge in Alaska? Why should a man in Alabama fund a highway in CA?
Has the US public school system so corrupted our understanding of government that nobody on
Where are the patriots that say "Perhaps increasing taxes on Americans right now is a bad idea in terms of economic policy and individual liberty?", who think "Why are we all supposed to work for the American dream of become something great or someone successful only to discover our reward is a higher tax burden? Why are we taxing success?"
Where are those who are opposed to the patriot act? So you believe it is wrong for the government to listen to your phone calls, but you have no problem with them tracking your vehicles location with a remote GPS monitoring device? Are the chains any less effective if they are invisible and electronic then they would be if they were cold and steal? Government has no right to know this private information.
Where is the
Are we so lost from the ideas of the founders that we just lie down and submit to excessive taxation these days?
Candlestick makers upset with Edison.
Would you prefer to have no option and simply die or the option pay and be saved?
You seem to advocate the position to pay indirectly (i.e. via high taxes or somebody else's wallet).
Understand that any government that can save your life, can take it away.
In short you prefer to surrender your rights for security (which, will leave you with neither). I prefer to have liberty and be responsible for myself and my family.
Why must you take our people's hard earned money? Why don't you pay for your BS and leave me alone?
National health care is unconstitutional so it cannot be done without an amendment, because the 10th amendment leaves this right to the states. So a state like MA can socialize health care and states like TX may not.
The beauty of the Constitutional framework is that you can live in a state that supports your values (a nanny state), while I can live in a state the supports mine (limited government with low taxes).
How would you feel if you were drowning in the lake and there was a line to use the flotation device? See France, UK and Canadian solutions.
How would you feel if you were drowning in the lake and the government didn't toss you a flotation device you payed for because they gave it to somebody else instead? Read the current draft bill.
How would you feel if you were standing on the side of the lake, saw somebody in trouble, but when you went to save them a government panel intervened and prevented you from getting in the water, because the only approved treatments are 1). boat rescue or 2). certified swimmer? Read the current draft bill.
How would you feel if your parents or kids were drowning and the government told the people on the side on to not go and save them, because they were to remain ready to save people between the ages of 15-50 and not to bother with the young or the old. Read the current draft bill.
How would you feel if you being a great swimmer were comfortable taking a chance in the lake, but the government required you either pay for a private life guard, rent the government life guard or pay a tax equal to 2.5% of your salary (unless you are "an illegal resident", cannot make this up, it is in the bill). And then after 5 years your employer will have to pay a 8% fine if you use a private life guard instead of a government life guard. Read the current draft bill.
CA's loss is Seattle's and Austin's gain. Why would you start a company in CA and have to pay so much in taxes and worry about reliable power and whatnot, when you could instead be in WA or TX with no state income tax?
CA doesn't have a lock on smart tech people, plus the longer CA allows problems to exist, the more those great programmers, investors, system admins, network engineers and whatnot are dispersing to other parts of the country.
Silicon Valley in CA? No thanks, I will take Silicon Hills in Austin, TX, because I make the same pay, but in Austin I get to keep more of it.
Why in the world does the data center have to be next door to you?
With tools like VPN, HP's ILO, Dell's DRAC, and countless other hardware management console ports, serial to Ethernet switches, KVM to VNC or whatever else, it's really easy to rarely if ever see the "hardware".
I mean come on, we're "slash dot", if we cannot install Linux, change the configuration in IOS, or patch/reboot Windows from 400+ miles away, we may have to change our name to "wiener dot".
I don't want to be wiener dot.
One would think the SSN could serve as a unique identifier.
And our non-representative representatives in Congress wonder why so many people don't trust them to run the healthcare system.
I can see it now
We're sorry Matt Hew Johnson, we accidentally removed your leg as per operation instructions intended for Matthew Johnson down the hall. Now I know you think you got the bad end of the deal. I mean you loosing your leg and him getting the heart transplant you expected, but before you start complaining, recognize, you are B+ and he is type A-. Poor bastard will be lucky if he makes it through the night, which means your likely to get double breakfast tomorrow courtesy of Uncle Sammy. That should cheer you up, gimpy. Well, I would love to stay and chat, but union regs say I get to take a 30 minute break every half hour.
I guess my point is only people who lack vision, guts and balls only want to use robots.
one-time fee of $0.99 to resume unlimited listening to music for a month
How is it you pay a one time fee for a monthly service?
Should it be:
-- OR --
I would much rather see international collaboration to develop technology that mitigates the effectiveness and deadliness of nuclear weapons.
So why is Obama entertaining the idea that the US may stop or delay missile defense systems? Shouldn't we be investing more, not less into defensive solutions?
I honestly believe the size of our national debt and our federal governments spending habits will do more damage to the US economy and quality of life for citizens than 12 nuclear warheads could do.
you've got a long way to go before you can start preaching to countries with a dozen or nuclear weapons about the need for restraint.
If we have little or no nukes left, why would the listen?
I find it odd that people have a problem with the United States having weapons of mass destruction. Given that we have been in the Korean war, the Vietnam War, two Gulf wars and countless military operations without using them.
The fact that we were willing to settle on a stalemate in Korea and actually lost Vietnam, yet had enough restraint to not use our arsenal demonstrates we have control and restraint (Hence we have earned the right to preach).
The same cannot be said for North Korea (who does not have sufficient working nukes), yet has fired missiles and tested nukes whenever it wants something from the world (if only to be paid attention to) or Iran (which is not there yet) but has proclaimed they would use them as soon as they get them on Israel (Doesn't show much control, regard for life, regard for environment or understanding).
Furthermore, a Republic or a Democracy is naturally more restrained or at least slower to act (if for no other reason then the required public debate cycles) then a dictatorship or oligarchy.
Listen I am going to drop a huge bombshell on how GS makes their money and it has nothing to do with source code or trading. Ready?
... wait for it ... nothing. Call it Cap 'n Trade, make people think it will help environment, knowing that in truth it will not cut back on global pollution, that it will ship manufacturing to other countries along with jobs. Tell people it doesn't tax them and will create jobs (I mean with all the money GS execs will be making they can higher more gophers to get them coffee and they will be going out in NYC to eat expensive meals and that will employ aspiring actors ... I mean waiters). Don't tax/charge people directly just tax companies, services and products the people cannot do without. When prices go up on those things blame the very companies that GS and US federal government are robbing with a pen (guns are so small time) and say it is their ... wait for it ... "selfish greed". Have system in place so the shares of nothing you are trading become more and more rare over time to ensure you get larger and larger pay outs and hope US public is to stupid to vote out every paid politician you had in your pocket to vote for it. Rememeber avoid and deflect, blame the other side. ... wait for it ... "the children". If person is using slashdot then mod them -1 TROLL.
Step 1: Buy Republicans
Step 2: Hedge investment and buy Democrats
Step 3: Create illusion that there is a difference between above to avoid discovery that you own both. Get people to vote for their party each election, one thing you don't want is for people catch on and vote against all incumbents which you are heavily invested into and who have been there long enough to feel comfortable bending rules or outright breaking law.
Step 4: Make money trading stocks, bonds and commodities using leverage from 1,2,3 and 5.
Step 5: If nobody to buy, have former GS executives run. See Corzine - D - NJ Governor and Paulson - R - Former Treasury Secretary.
Step 6: If GS fails to make money on step 4, get politicians to bail you out indirectly to avoid blame. For example get them to bailout your failing investment AIG, then have AIG kick you back the $20 billion you gave them. Sure take direct bailout money, but give it back should public try to regulate GS salaries or demand transparency.
Step 7: Act like you are better at making money because you are really really smart and it has nothing to do with the fact that you are in a position to change the rules. Look down on little people and small businesses trying to compete while playing by rules.
Step 8: As if making money trading actual items by influencing markets/politicians isn't profitable enough, kick it up a notch and make money trading
Step 9: If questioned or called out, act as if there is no way the person pointing out truth could possibly understand the complexities of the system and therefore and unqualified to comment. If person is in energy production label them greedy capitalistic ways". If somebody from any other sector of economy comes forward to detail insanity of scam, I mean legislation, label them a racist or proclaim they don't care about
Step 10: Goto Step 1.
I find it interesting and scary that in a story about using GPS to apply vehicle taxes, most posts are suggesting alternative forms of taxation.
/. that government be allowed to raise taxes on those very people?
"Just raise the gasoline tax"
"Tax based on the odometer reading."
Why isn't anybody posting a more sensible alternative? "Government shouldn't raise our taxes while we are hurting and must spend within it's means."
Governments should spend within their means just like people who bought too much home or ran up large credit card balances or have taken an income hit are now learning to live within their means. Citizens are having to seriously cut back on expenses and for the first time in decades are starting to save money and/or pay down debt.
So why shouldn't we demand that our government do the same?" In CA the government said "we will cut some spending, but we also want to raise your taxes as well." The people in CA said "No, stop raising taxes, focus on cutting more spending." The CA government and the Federal government aren't getting it, yet. However, we have to stand tall and tell our local, state and federal governments to not tax us anymore, to stop borrowing and to spend less.
If they are getting less tax revenue because people have lost their jobs or are trying to pay down debt, how does it seem sensible to anybody on
If you are unemployed (or retired living on a fixed income) right now, does it make sense for the government to increase the cost of electricity, heating oil and gasoline on you right now? If you are trying to pay down your student loans or car loan or credit card debt, does it make sense for government to take more of your income and impede your efforts? If you are trying to sell you house, does it make sense for the government to increase taxes and in the process reduce the number of potential buyers with enough remaining income to afford your house?"
THE SOLUTION IS TO FIGHT ALL INCREASED TAX INCREASES AND VOTE OUT SUPPORTERS OF THEM REGARDLESS OF PARTY.
They already do write down the mileage when you get the emissions checked.
I find it funny that you have posted an answer on /. that applies to your state when there are readers from 49 other states and the rest of the world, to which what you say may not be true. For example, I don't have to submit to an emissions test where I live.
Raising the gas tax is far cheaper, impossible to turn into Big Brother, and localizes the the state and community pretty well, on average.
And not raising the federal gas tax and having having the Senate kill Cap and Trade will be even cheaper still and allows state and local governments to decide how to handle the situation. It should be common sense that the closer the government is to the people the more respectful of the people's needs it will be, which is they Americans should support stronger state governments and a weaker central government. Unfortunately while it should be common sense, it is not.
I agree the Sony MP3 players are much better in terms of features like FM radio, bluetooth headphone support, easy to upload and change music as well as use to store other files like your resume. It is also cheaper for the size of storage and options you get.
The iPhone is winning on the basis of having a much superior interface
Here is the best AD for Android, you run it the end of this year or early 2010.
You have a cut of the Apple conference where they show how many apps they have compared to other phones with the date. - Advantage iPhone
Then you show the current apps between Android and the iPhone with trend lines and the date Android will pass the iPhone sometime next year. - Advantage Android
Then you show apps that Apple has banned but are available for Android, starting with wifi tethering that allows you to connect multiple Windows, Linux and OS X machines to your service providers network, etc. - Advantage Android
Then you run the number of iPhone models available versus the number of Android phones available. Phones with keyboards or without keyboards, phones from HTC, motorola and Samsung (all will have phones by the end of 2009). - Advantage Android
Then you show how iPhone only works on AT&T and how Android works on T-Mobile or AT&T and probably other providers by the end of year. - Advantage Android
So you basically say, do you want the most censored apps you can play in the foreground right now? Apps that are policed by Apple and AT&T?
Or do you want the phone what has the most apps by end of 2010, is open, with advanced apps, background services and alerts, etc. with more choices on service providers and hardware manufactures?
Do you want a phone that you can hack and customize endlessly, a phone you can tweak infinitely and even code for yourself or your friends?
In short do you want to feel cool, or do you want to be free (which is what makes most people cool)?
I don't think you understand freedom and liberty. In a free society, taxes should not be use to curb or alter behavior. I see no difference between using a gun or using a tax to force a person to do something they otherwise would not do.
/. going "WTF?".
I believe that taxes have one single purpose. To fund the government. Therefore I believe it is immoral and wrong to tax things differently in an attempt to alter an individual's behavior. Why should the tax on alcohol be hirer then the tax on say a video game or a movie ticket? Why should gasoline be taxed at a different rate then milk? Taxes should be clearly identified (which is not the case with gasoline, where government makes a larger profit then the oil companies already).
Taxes should not be used as a subversive method to influence free choices.
Furthermore, your argument suggests if you tax something, you get less of it, or rather people buy/use less of it. Which is true, so why are we taxing income and savings? If the government taxes income, it stands to reason people will work less? So if the government and you and I all believe taxing "bad things" like gas and booze reduces consumption, why are we taxing "positive things" like income and talking about taxing "helpful things" like health benefits?
In a free society, neither the gun nor taxes should be used against people to restrict their choices. So I say let's toss IRS tax code out and abolish the 16th amendment and replace it with an amendment that says the federal government can only tax a standard % at the retail level that is the same on whatever you buy, wherever you buy it (we don't want o discriminate certain items/products or places. Discrimination is wrong). Be it diapers or a Lexus. If you buy more expensive things you pay more taxes, so have no fear the rich in this case will continue to pay a larger share.
Finally it rewards savings (the lack of savings and the spending of more then we made is what caused recession). It was greed from the individual level to the corporate level to the government level that is now requiring a correction. Many Americans are getting it and correcting the problems that lead us to where we are. Many businesses and people have changed their behavior and spending and/or are now saving more and paying down debt. It is the government that has actually increased the amount of money it spends. It is the government that has not learned or understood. It is the government that is on the wrong side of historical and financial truths.
If Americans pay down debt, drive less and do other things because they believe it is the best plan for protecting their well being that is great. But the government is telling us conflicting lies and saying we should go out and spend, first Bush did it after 9/11 and the Republicans cheered and the Democrats booed. Now Obama says "Go out and spend, things are starting to turn around" (which is BS), and the Dems cheer and the GOP boos and I am one of maybe 3 people on
Your suggestion to tax gasoline to change human behavior is in conflict with a free society. In a free society, you don't need to worry about what other people do. If you want to drive less to save yourself some money or to help keep the Earth clean, well then right on, do it. Don't worry about others, many will do what you are doing, many will not. All you need to do is not threaten their freedom with taxes or a gun.
These are loans not grants and have to be repaid.
Are all loans repaid? No, well then it puts tax payers at risk. Also winners are picked by those the government funds, can you get a government loan for a green energy idea you have? No, you aren't "big" enough, you aren't "connected" enough, you haven't given enough money to one or both parties. This model is unjust and puts tax payers at risk without their approval, why not let Americans vote on what projects to fund? If Tesla was a good investment, why couldn't they get enough funding from private investors to not require government backing? Don't you think now that the government has backed Tesla it could be motivated to pressure or push against rivals should they appear?
If you are against the model I posted earlier, that means you are against the X Prize and Google models of funding innovation.
Christine Peterson coined the term 'open source.'
Oh no she didn't.
It was Eric S. Raymond.
People who claim that Obama or the American Democratic party for that matter is socialist needs to take a trip around the globe.
I think you need to take a trip around the globe, or at the very least read more about what others in the world are saying about Obama.
It's not that you don't know anything, it is just that you know so much that isn't true.