Check the http://www.jetbrains.com/webstorm/features/ - it has support for inline JS and CSS editing. With inspections, autocomplete and refactorings. There are also nice features like highlighting and syntax checks for regular expressions inside the JS code.
Oh, there are also lightning-fast "Find usages" feature and code navigation for JS and CSS.
It's miles ahead of _everything_ else in usability and features.
The current problems were brought to us by governments exerting too LITTLE control on dangerous financial instruments.
If anything, governments don't do much in our current economy. We should be having a New New Deal by now, with massive government-funded infrastructure projects over the whole USA and Europe.
But all we've had was a small (yes, small) stimulus package.
"*Yawn*. BitCoin has guaranteed deflation of the *money supply*. This is different than *price deflation* which is usually what people are talking about when they talk about deflation. Yes, sometimes they occur at the same time, but not always. Price deflation is practically synonymous with recession (a shrinking economy). If the economy is growing fast enough, money supply deflation won't mean price deflation. You can say that in the long run, there is guaranteed deflation."
Care to give a few examples of economy with deflating money supply which is growing at least 3-5% at the same time for at least 2-3 years? I know exactly zero of them.
"They believe that erosion of purchasing power will be offset by the returns on GDP growth but i don't see any convincing proof anywhere, quite the contrary."
Hey, what about the USA? Or post-USSR Russia? Or Chile? Or Brasil?
"Fake boom based on on nothing more but monetary policy invariably ends"
In the long run we're all dead.
"with a bust and deflation is there to liquidate excess inventories built upon rosy projections of a bubble."
Unless government steps in and replaces reduced demand with government-funded demand to refuel the bubble.
"If you cry a river because of all the poor becoming even poorer in heartless capitalist economies - guess what, they are slowly wiped by the very inflation you propose that eats their rarely updated wages and modest savings. "
Nope. Investments in bonds and stock market tend to grow faster than the economy. And as I've said, if you have a deflation then you won't really have much savings in the first place. Look at Japan, it had a near-zero inflation with several dips into deflation for a decade. Total savings have actually decreased in that period: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vhPkPUN2aT8/S1dxroArbYI/AAAAAAAABZk/EkSyucPxnQk/s1600-h/savings+rate+households.JPG , see here for the paper: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15601 - it's not actually that bad, dis-savings are compensated by the shifted structure of savings, but it's still not good - there's no significant growth.
"You seriously think that politicians can control the economy? Everything would be better if they couldn't. Name one successful man-made intervention in natural ecosystem that didn't bite in the ass with tons of unpleasant unintended consequences."
You're changing topics. I can name A LOT of successful interventions into economy which resulted in good well-being for at least a generation. That's because economy is not a natural phenomenon, it certainly can be influenced (which you do admit by citing bad consequences - they are results of actions).
Ideally, you'd want money supply to be a little bit ahead of the total value of goods in the economy to finance new investments. The problem is, the 'total amount of goods and services' and total money supply is not well defined when one considers leveraged bank deposits, debts, stock market and so on.
Increasing money supply by a constant fraction each year is a nice idea, that should work fine in a steady-state economy. Except that we don't have one, we keep on getting into stagflations, liquidity traps, bubbles of over-leveraged debt and so on.
"Any money they print just steals purchasing power from those with money."
And having a fixed money supply assures that the quantity of people with money stays small and relatively constant. That's actually quite simple - if you have a fixed amount of money then only a fixed (and usually small) amount of people can be rich. Because if you gain a dollar then someone else must have lost it. Zero-sum game.
Flexible money supply allows it to stop being zero-sum by inflating the money supply.
"They don't create any goods or services, they deplete them."
Well, the Interstate Road System looks quite solid for me. And it was 100% debt-financed.
"Instead of another taxman trying to take money from the person that pays their salary through force, we could have $50,000 worth of new shirts, shoes, cars.... whatever YOU want with YOUR money. "
Nope. Without inflation YOU won't have those nice shirts and cars. Don't believe me? Look no farther than Latvia and Estonia. They have a _deflation_ and 25% unemployment rate.
The problem is, intermediary currencies are not that useful in the real world. Legitimate businesses don't need anonymous transactions, so there's no advantage in using bitcoins for them. Global currency markets are also highly liquid, so businesses can easily exchange their currencies without the help of a proxy currency. Dollars/euros are useful not only because they are proxies, but also because they can be used for other things - investments, bonds, bank deposits, etc.
Though having an untraceable currency for online payments does have its advantages for individual people (not businesses).
It's long known that economic growth is severely stunted without some measure of inflation. Adopting bitcoins for the global economy would mean that policymakers lose control on money supply, and while there are advantages in this, disadvantages far outweigh them. Additionally, adopting a global currency standard will deny governments ability to influence currency rates robbing them of yet another way to control the economy.
Is there any plan to solve this? Maybe a system of independent bitcoin 'roots' operated by governments would help?
Is realtime ocean temperature important to you as well? No? Now think about weather forecasting.
Salinity drives ocean currents, which are important for climate. Do you want to know if a particular piece of land will have more storms in the next 20 years? Well, this satellite will help to predict such things.
And then your cubes will be concentrated by the currents in several zones, leaving large swathes of ocean uncovered. That's the problem with autonomous floating stations. It has been tried earlier for temperature measurement - it hasn't worked much better either.
Also, salinity can change as a result of storms, weather, etc. We'd like to watch it in realtime, which these cubes won't allow to do.
Actually, no. Voice recognition works fairly OK with Russian language.
For instance, I'm using it on my phone to do voice search. The last search was "The Sword of Damocles" (I wanted to read the legend which gave rise to this expression), it's pronounced "Damoclov mech" in Russian and Google understood it just fine. Try that in English now - it just doesn't work.
I can also use voice recognition to dictate large texts. Good recognition engine produces near perfect output.
That's what you get if you use a language with non-crazy spelling. Additionally, grammar cases in Russian seem to work as error correction codes.
Voice-based lie detection, though, definitely does not work.
Pres. Medvedev is a great troll! Unfortunately, he doesn't decide anything in Russia - Putin does.
For example, quite recently "Deep Purple" was forced to pay $15000 for performance of music by "Deep Purple" (http://russian-law.livejournal.com/44954.html)!
You see, there's a mandatory 'performance fee' in Russia which goes toward central agency which then distributes gathered money to artists (minus 15% commission). Also they receive 1% of sale price for all computing equipment. And about 0.1 cent from each square meter of hotel space. And also there's no practical way to opt-out out of this system for artists.
So Medvedev can talk all he wants, it won't change a thing.
"Everything changes - the megas wouldn't exist if government wasn't there, protecting them from any competition, saving them from their resource mis-management, which ultimately collapses them."
Dude, learn your history. Mega-corporations will just _replace_ the government.
I'm totally realistic about nuclear - it's not going anywhere. A lot of countries will experience knee-jerk reaction and pull support from it. It's a political win right now: Greenpeace will be pacified, and new fossil fuel contracts can't hurt since a lot of governments are quite close with fossil energy lobby.
And nobody is serious about CO2 reduction, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, and now ask if there is a statistically significant warming since 1985 or 1975.
Hint, answer is: "Definitely, yes".
And your link tells a differnt story. Stop trolling.
So, you're a oh-so-smart goldbugger?
Care to list me countries where goldbuggy economic doctrine has helped with the growth and kept a country out of recessions?
Not even close.
Check the http://www.jetbrains.com/webstorm/features/ - it has support for inline JS and CSS editing. With inspections, autocomplete and refactorings. There are also nice features like highlighting and syntax checks for regular expressions inside the JS code.
Oh, there are also lightning-fast "Find usages" feature and code navigation for JS and CSS.
It's miles ahead of _everything_ else in usability and features.
The current problems were brought to us by governments exerting too LITTLE control on dangerous financial instruments.
If anything, governments don't do much in our current economy. We should be having a New New Deal by now, with massive government-funded infrastructure projects over the whole USA and Europe.
But all we've had was a small (yes, small) stimulus package.
Easy.
For example, you can become unemployed because your shop had to cut their expenses to lower prices.
Just ask Latvia or Estonia with their 25% unemployment rate.
You're missing the point. Deflating money supply benefits the ones who have it. However, it actively harms everyone - the standard tragedy of commons.
"*Yawn*. BitCoin has guaranteed deflation of the *money supply*. This is different than *price deflation* which is usually what people are talking about when they talk about deflation. Yes, sometimes they occur at the same time, but not always. Price deflation is practically synonymous with recession (a shrinking economy). If the economy is growing fast enough, money supply deflation won't mean price deflation. You can say that in the long run, there is guaranteed deflation."
Care to give a few examples of economy with deflating money supply which is growing at least 3-5% at the same time for at least 2-3 years? I know exactly zero of them.
"They believe that erosion of purchasing power will be offset by the returns on GDP growth but i don't see any convincing proof anywhere, quite the contrary."
Hey, what about the USA? Or post-USSR Russia? Or Chile? Or Brasil?
"Fake boom based on on nothing more but monetary policy invariably ends"
In the long run we're all dead.
"with a bust and deflation is there to liquidate excess inventories built upon rosy projections of a bubble."
Unless government steps in and replaces reduced demand with government-funded demand to refuel the bubble.
"If you cry a river because of all the poor becoming even poorer in heartless capitalist economies - guess what, they are slowly wiped by the very inflation you propose that eats their rarely updated wages and modest savings. "
Nope. Investments in bonds and stock market tend to grow faster than the economy. And as I've said, if you have a deflation then you won't really have much savings in the first place. Look at Japan, it had a near-zero inflation with several dips into deflation for a decade. Total savings have actually decreased in that period: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vhPkPUN2aT8/S1dxroArbYI/AAAAAAAABZk/EkSyucPxnQk/s1600-h/savings+rate+households.JPG , see here for the paper: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15601 - it's not actually that bad, dis-savings are compensated by the shifted structure of savings, but it's still not good - there's no significant growth.
"You seriously think that politicians can control the economy? Everything would be better if they couldn't. Name one successful man-made intervention in natural ecosystem that didn't bite in the ass with tons of unpleasant unintended consequences."
You're changing topics. I can name A LOT of successful interventions into economy which resulted in good well-being for at least a generation. That's because economy is not a natural phenomenon, it certainly can be influenced (which you do admit by citing bad consequences - they are results of actions).
Ideally, you'd want money supply to be a little bit ahead of the total value of goods in the economy to finance new investments. The problem is, the 'total amount of goods and services' and total money supply is not well defined when one considers leveraged bank deposits, debts, stock market and so on.
Increasing money supply by a constant fraction each year is a nice idea, that should work fine in a steady-state economy. Except that we don't have one, we keep on getting into stagflations, liquidity traps, bubbles of over-leveraged debt and so on.
"hypocrite oath"
I thought that was the right to be free to change one's beliefs whenever it's convenient: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/01/10/
"Any money they print just steals purchasing power from those with money."
And having a fixed money supply assures that the quantity of people with money stays small and relatively constant. That's actually quite simple - if you have a fixed amount of money then only a fixed (and usually small) amount of people can be rich. Because if you gain a dollar then someone else must have lost it. Zero-sum game.
Flexible money supply allows it to stop being zero-sum by inflating the money supply.
"They don't create any goods or services, they deplete them."
Well, the Interstate Road System looks quite solid for me. And it was 100% debt-financed.
"Instead of another taxman trying to take money from the person that pays their salary through force, we could have $50,000 worth of new shirts, shoes, cars.... whatever YOU want with YOUR money. "
Nope. Without inflation YOU won't have those nice shirts and cars. Don't believe me? Look no farther than Latvia and Estonia. They have a _deflation_ and 25% unemployment rate.
The problem is, intermediary currencies are not that useful in the real world. Legitimate businesses don't need anonymous transactions, so there's no advantage in using bitcoins for them. Global currency markets are also highly liquid, so businesses can easily exchange their currencies without the help of a proxy currency. Dollars/euros are useful not only because they are proxies, but also because they can be used for other things - investments, bonds, bank deposits, etc.
Though having an untraceable currency for online payments does have its advantages for individual people (not businesses).
Keynes, Milton, Freedman, Krugman...
Read them. It's good for you.
What about the lack of inflation?
It's long known that economic growth is severely stunted without some measure of inflation. Adopting bitcoins for the global economy would mean that policymakers lose control on money supply, and while there are advantages in this, disadvantages far outweigh them. Additionally, adopting a global currency standard will deny governments ability to influence currency rates robbing them of yet another way to control the economy.
Is there any plan to solve this? Maybe a system of independent bitcoin 'roots' operated by governments would help?
Is realtime ocean temperature important to you as well? No? Now think about weather forecasting.
Salinity drives ocean currents, which are important for climate. Do you want to know if a particular piece of land will have more storms in the next 20 years? Well, this satellite will help to predict such things.
So, 60 percent of US citizens are dumb as a desk or misinformed?
Figures.
"Or use a satellite launched while we are bankrupt"
You are not bankrupt, sorry guv. Your government can borrow at about 2.5% rate, which certainly doesn't indicate bankruptcy.
However, your banana-republic Republican government is indeed bankrupt - their brains got eaten by zombies.
And then your cubes will be concentrated by the currents in several zones, leaving large swathes of ocean uncovered. That's the problem with autonomous floating stations. It has been tried earlier for temperature measurement - it hasn't worked much better either.
Also, salinity can change as a result of storms, weather, etc. We'd like to watch it in realtime, which these cubes won't allow to do.
Actually, no. Voice recognition works fairly OK with Russian language.
For instance, I'm using it on my phone to do voice search. The last search was "The Sword of Damocles" (I wanted to read the legend which gave rise to this expression), it's pronounced "Damoclov mech" in Russian and Google understood it just fine. Try that in English now - it just doesn't work.
I can also use voice recognition to dictate large texts. Good recognition engine produces near perfect output.
That's what you get if you use a language with non-crazy spelling. Additionally, grammar cases in Russian seem to work as error correction codes.
Voice-based lie detection, though, definitely does not work.
It's worse in Russia. RAO gets 1% cut from _every_ sale of computing devices (including video cards, hard drives, flash dongles, etc.).
For example, if I buy a pre-assembled computer here I might end up paying 2-3% of its value to RAO.
Pres. Medvedev is a great troll! Unfortunately, he doesn't decide anything in Russia - Putin does.
For example, quite recently "Deep Purple" was forced to pay $15000 for performance of music by "Deep Purple" (http://russian-law.livejournal.com/44954.html)!
You see, there's a mandatory 'performance fee' in Russia which goes toward central agency which then distributes gathered money to artists (minus 15% commission). Also they receive 1% of sale price for all computing equipment. And about 0.1 cent from each square meter of hotel space. And also there's no practical way to opt-out out of this system for artists.
So Medvedev can talk all he wants, it won't change a thing.
Well, 'Roman' (with the stress on the second syllable) is a common first name in Russian as well :)
"Everything changes - the megas wouldn't exist if government wasn't there, protecting them from any competition, saving them from their resource mis-management, which ultimately collapses them."
Dude, learn your history. Mega-corporations will just _replace_ the government.
I'm totally realistic about nuclear - it's not going anywhere. A lot of countries will experience knee-jerk reaction and pull support from it. It's a political win right now: Greenpeace will be pacified, and new fossil fuel contracts can't hurt since a lot of governments are quite close with fossil energy lobby.
And nobody is serious about CO2 reduction, of course.