You clearly don't own an elderly equine. Once they can't chew hay anymore, your options ( short of having them put down ) are damn expensive- feed costing $8-16 a bag, at least 6-8 bags a month. It can add up pretty fast, especially for something you can't really ride much if at all.
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth, *if* you know someone who'll pay you for horse meat. Otherwise, you might want to consider taking a look. In my state, it's not even legal to sell your horse for rendering. From what I've learned recently, it'll cost $140 just to have my old horse hauled away...
yea yea, I know, totally off-topic, it's just an expression, etc. It's a stupid, incorrect, outdated expression, and my post isn't terribly off-topic given that context. I'm bored, leave me alone;-)
99.99999% of OSX users have no interest in creating digital music. Maybe a small percentage fire it up a couple of times to make some fun noise but thats it. Apple should unbundle this and slash the price of OSX.
While I doubt your market research, and your ability to recognize that OS X sells separately from iLife, I understand the source of your confusion.
iLife is bundled with new Apple hardware, so you get a copy when you buy a new iBook, iMac, PowerMac, etc.
Now, maybe you won't use GarageBand, but I'm going to guess that 99.999999% of OS users have some interest in one of iPhoto, iMovie, or iDVD. Ok, mainly iPhoto. But do you really think Apple would be able to drop the price of their machines by much if they excluded a single program that costs less than $50 ?? Why am I answering this troll?
Really, GarageBand is there for semiserious users of iMovie and iDVD- so you can put together a little tune for your home movie project. It's totally useful and doesn't affect the price of the overall package much at all.
You missed the post above yours, "why not use Objective-C?"
If you want cross-platform and (fairly) strong typing, use Java, if you want loose typing and want Linux or OS X, use Objective-C ( GNUStep/Cocoa respectively for UIs ), if you want M$, use Visual Studio C++ or flavor-of-the-moment C#, or flavor-of-the-last-moment VisualBasic, or ( somebody's favorite Wxyz windows-centric development platform here )...
But seriously ( for a moment ), without asking why not use Java, why use C# ? What's the benefit over *anything* else, other than Microsoft is pushing it hard ?
Wow. That is really, really, really geeky. Quite possibly the geekiest thing I've ever seen on slashdot.
As impressed as I am, and as much as I understand it's "cool project" and "educational value" and "because I can" aspects, I'm still puzzled as to why you'd do this, other than to keep you off the street and off IRC/crack/whatever...
Seriously, though, what kind of game did he write for that display? Text adventure? Two-line pong? What?
I have to strongly agree... Java is at the very least a "published", well-documented standard. You can look up JVM bytecode interpreter definitions and library API for free. In this sense, I think it's very wrong to call Java a "closed" standard, especially under the proposed test-to-license scheme.
On the other hand, at least currently, if you want to call it "Java", no you can't just do your own implementation and call it "Java", you have to ( as far as I know ) also pass the test suite, and ( I think ) pay a fee. I'm sure you have to pay the fee if you're going to use your JVM in a commercial product.
This probably isn't making ( and never was intended to make ) much cash for Sun, though, if they're thinking of essentially doing away with the fees, that's my guess.
What do you think you get if you license Java right now? It's all about standards and this test suite...
That whole Microsoft lawsuit was about keeping JVMs compatable, and this test suite is a key part of ensuring that various implementations are compatable.
Open source Sun's JVM implementation(s) and require any modifications of the code to pass the test suite as well or better than the original(s)? Sounds like a good deal to me...
well, now I've read TFM, and I still have no idea what this is all really about.
It's pretty thin on details; all we know is MS is trying to push through some CD copy protection standard without having to specifiy ( yet ) what it is.
Good commercial software (emphasis on GOOD) has a large, dedicated testing team that has put a lot of time and effort into developing various tools, well-documented test plans, huge suites of test cases, regular automated test runs that catch introduced bugs quickly, and so in.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Somebody mod that guy up as Funny!!!
Or, if you're not trying to be funny, you've clearly never worked in QA, or... maybe you've just explained that there are few GOOD pieces of commercial software...
Anyway, let me assure you that I worked a lot of QA gigs, and in every single one of them, the QA team was dwarfed by the dev team, rarely had good specs to plan from, and found their test time was viewed the most expendable part of the product cycle ( it's the first one to shrink in case of a slip elsewhere ). And those automated tests? Those paths you automate aren't likely to have *glaring* problems- at lest not ones the automated tools can catch - it's just the cases QA didn't have time to code up that'll fail... and of course, you can't automate something until the program is available, can you ? In practice, automated tools are only *really* useful for regression testing.
The most important thing I learned working QA is that the best QA in the world won't save you from a poorly planned or managed project, poor design, coders who don't unit test, or marketing guys who promise the sky and give a fixed do-or-die ship date to go with that sky. Code review is usually better than QA at finding non-design-related bugs. If the coders are good, QA ends up finding usability issues, rather than functionality issues, which is your best-case scenario, even though it means your prototyping and design phase was lacking.
If they ran office on Linux, a lot of people would lose their only reason for sticking with Windows.
I'd agree with this argument if Office v.X had people flocking to OS X. But that's clearly not the case. People buy Windows for one reason- it's the far-and-away market leader. If they buy hardware, it'll likely be supported; if they find a software package, it'll likely have a version or competitor on Windows. That's the *only* reason to buy Windows, isn't it?
If MS had some way to do it cheaply and thought they'd turn a good profit on it, they'd do a Linux port. They're business men first.
But ask yourself this- what are the sales numbers of any other major commercial Linux application ? When those numbers are large enough, there *will* be MS Office for Linux- right about the time that Windows installed market share slips below 70% or so, I'm guessing, or when Linux desktops make up more than 15% of the business market.
From TFM : * Up to 3000 feet range (Indoor/Urban environments, @9600 RF data rate)
We're talking about this thing for what reason?
CmdrTaco, please, drink some Jolt and wake up. That's twice in one day you've made me want to smack you around for wasting my time. 9600 baud? Really, why would we want to use this?
To compare this to 802.11b, they have what looks like a version that operates in the 2.4GHz band, guess what? 1500ft range, at 9600 baud.
While I'll admit this thing might have some very specific uses, like remote data collection where you don't have a lot of data, but you want it delivered at regular intervals over a distance where it'd be hard to put in relays or run a real link... but the damn thing costs more than $400, so if you *can* use 802.11g instead, you'll probably want to!
I'm shocked this question hasn't seen more discussion.
Of course, the devil is in the license, and Sun has historically an 'interesting' take on what "open" means. Maybe it'll be "open" like Microsoft code is "open".
But this announcement does bring up a lot of questions, like: does this mean that they're willing/able to say "no SysV IP in Solaris 10" ? Or that they're someohow able to 'open' some SysV code or IP ( over SCO's nearly-dead body ) ??
It would seem that *one* of these would have to be the case, unless they're buying out SCO or have an interesting Novell agreement or something else is going on...
It does make you wonder, though, if they can do something like this, why did they expand the SCO SysV license ?
Why? Because I apparently read/. more than the current bunch of editors. Or at least I remember the stories. I didn't *need* to search, I saw the headline and thought "idiots, this was a story just a couple of months ago".
Really, do they even bother to *try* to see if a story is a dupe? Or do they purposely dupe stories that got a good amount of traffic in the past ?
While I'm tempted to think they're greedy, it's more realistic to believe they're just forgetful and lazy.
let the bastard honk. As a frequent pedestrian, I can't tell you how many times I've almost walked *into* the car of some jerk-off rolling a red light right-hand turn. It's a lame thing to do- enough people do it, you'll find right-on-red illegal.
You're *supposed* to stop at red lights, it keeps people from getting killed, that's why they're *red*.
In all seriousness ( although, maybe sadly, we do all of the above, and my son is an expert on the Noggin and Sesame Street websites ), my post was *designed* for the "Funny" rating it now has... still, it is true that Tivo and Netflix are my two favorite entertainment sources. I'd probably give up my horses first, if only because they're more expensive...
I'm only posting on/. because I'm at work, what else am I going to do? Oh, yea, right...
Sorry, man. I didn't mean to toss you into the Bush camp because you're not a Moore fan.
I put you there because you've defended ( make nothing of ) at least 3 actions of GW that, really, are kind of a big deal. I notice you didn't say "boo" about my remark regarding detaining US citizens without trial, for example.
Beyond that, do you know what was the president told? He was told that the WTC *and* the Pentagon had been attacked. It was pretty clear. Plenty of information. If it wasn't time for action, if it was something that could have waited until he was finished with the class, he wouldn't have been interrupted. You don't interrupt the president of the US for anything but something really serious. He should have known to get up and go. It's *wacky* that you would downplay that *unless* you're making excuses for the guy.
If you want to look to the source of the division in this country, you need to look no further than Bush himself. At this point, if you aren't totally pissed off at GW by the stuff he's done, you're either not paying attention, or you in a very real way *are* supporting his administration's actions. You don't need to support Moore, or Kerry, or anyone, but unless you support Bush, don't defend him- it's time to stand up for *something*, and it is time to pick a side. You're either for Bush, or you're against him. Pick one. It's sad that you have to, but that's reality.
Don't defend Bush's actions and whine about it when someone mistakes you for a Bush supporter. You're defending the man- that's support by definition.
Reading a children's book is a good example. What the fsck did you want the president to do? Throw the book up in the air and scream like a madman? Instantly launch a bunch of counterstrikes at a then unknown target? Hold a press conference within five minutes to present a weepy announcement?
Actually, holding *some* sort of a press conference would have been reasonable, but really, I'm puzzled by the idea that he might not have decided to just stand up, appologize to the class, say that he has important business to tend to, and leave. What did he do instead? What would *you* have done? Just sat there?
Moore didn't portray the event so much as he showed actual footage of it taking place. Actually, he spared the audience much of the ( extremely uncomfortable ) seven minutes.
That Moore showed it was just predictable. That you'd think Bush's reaction to news that the WTC was blown up is to sit for seven minutes is a BFD-class molehill is what's bizarre. I suppose detaining US citizens without access to a lawyer is a BFD-class molehill as well... as is shuttling the Bin Laden family out of the US while other commercial traffic is grounded... no, you're not a Bush supporter at all;-)
I'm encouraging everyong to read this book. These are some pretty damn big molehills.
Ok, I thought *I* was a conspiracy theory buff, but you've got the OKC bombing tied into middle eastern terrorists?!? Give me a break.
If you'd open your eyes, or even read Franken's book, you'd know that Clinton did a *lot* to combat Al-Queda and middle eastern terrorists- the notion that he did nothing is just another Bush administration lie. You remember that van bomb that went of in the basement of the WTC?? Where are the guys responsible? Oh, that's right, in jail, caught by the administration that "did nothing".
Using the lack of successful attacks on US soil as evidence of a "successful" war on terror is about as brilliant as ignoring the estate tax when talking about tax cuts. Or as honest as saying a tax cut biased towards the top 1% income bracket is "across-the-board".
Let's get one thing straight: you and I agree on the notion of a flat tax with an exemption for the very poor. But that's not something the Bush administration would go for, because funding their defense projects under such a scheme would mean leaving the flat tax at too high a rate. Also, your grip on the concept of "across-the-board" seems pretty loose, at best... at worst, you're repeating a lie, at best, you're playing fast-and-loose with a term.
I'm not trying to change your mind, I'm just asking you if you aren't maybe being just a little bit intellectually dishonest when you say "across-the-board"...
So, uh, was the repeal of the estate tax "across-the-board" ?!?
Care to refute analysis provided by a previous post which indicates you have the facts completely wrong? According to that chart, the top 1% of earners got a 5% tax reduction, and the *most* any other income group saw was a 1.4% reduction!
I'm sorry, I want to be really fair about this, but in any analysis, even percentage-paid-based, the majority of this administration's tax cuts ( especially if you include the estate tax ) are heavily weighted towards the very, very wealthy.
Ever get the feeling you've been lied to? I don't suppose you'd like to read "Lies and the Lying Liers Who Tell Them" for an amusing analysis of GW's twisted logic on this topic, which you've apparently decided to take as truth? Every Bush supporter and Fox News watcher should read it...
I do believe the war on terror is the single most important issue of the day- and I believe invading Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror, and that GW is the last guy we want in office while trying to hunt down a Bin Laden! WHY would you think this guy is good at getting rid of terrorists?!? So far, he's done little more than provide a fertile breeding ground for terrorists in Iraq... and used Bill Clinton's army to drive Al-Queda in Afganistan into hiding, something *any* administration would have done...
Isn't the point that anything that could even *remotely* be considered to be related to national security already is exempt from FOIA requests?
Please enlighten me if this exemption somehow doesn't apply to data from commercial satellite providers already; I could be wrong. But the point of TFA does seem to be that the recommendation is over-reaching because it would cut off access to public information without justification.
Maybe the proposal just needs an "iff such information being available could threaten national security" cop-out, er I mean clarification ?
I find U.S. politics to be *extremely* disturbing. There are folks who don't support a single thing on the Bush platform, but will vote for him because he's the Republican candidate. They don't agree with the Republican platform on abortion, criminal justice, military spending, the environment, education, the Iraq war, and won't benefit from tax cuts ( since they make less than $250k a year ), and they agree even less with the Bush administration itself ( gay marriage, draft-dodgers bashing Vietnam war heros, etc ), but they'll still vote GW.
I may never understand why... but then, lots of people bought Windows XP, there seem to be some decisions people make that are just hard to understand...
Worst part of this is, it'd be pathetically easy to program for this thing; it runs Java apps... from what he says in this interview, they intend to be a software/OS company and make money through licensing with developers and such?? I guess that's the reason for the 'gatekeeper' role?
And how exactly are their developers supposed to make money?
Why would I want to write a program for the Sidekick, exactly, given that Danger could cut off my access to it, or decide to not give me access at all?
I'd love to know the answers to those questions... if there was a way to make money in the space, I'm sure there are some apps I could throw together for this thing, especially if the best non-obvious example app he can think of is the "World Clock"!!
Then there's that 'new' lucrative Java Games area... which I guess is lucrative if you can get someone to buy your startup;-)
Those games alone ( oh, and Battlezone, too? OK! ) are going to justify the $20 price tag for the Anthology PS2 disc, in my eyes. This is exactly the kind of thing they *must* do if they want to be able to bitch about people trading ROMs for MAME.
And really, if I can play BattleZone with the dual analog controls on my PS2 dualshock controller? I'd *rather* play it on the console... this and the Sonic Mega Collection are going on my xmas list, right next to GTA: San Andreas, of course...
Slashdot Mirror
You clearly don't own an elderly equine. Once they can't chew hay anymore, your options ( short of having them put down ) are damn expensive- feed costing $8-16 a bag, at least 6-8 bags a month. It can add up pretty fast, especially for something you can't really ride much if at all.
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth, *if* you know someone who'll pay you for horse meat. Otherwise, you might want to consider taking a look. In my state, it's not even legal to sell your horse for rendering. From what I've learned recently, it'll cost $140 just to have my old horse hauled away...
yea yea, I know, totally off-topic, it's just an expression, etc. It's a stupid, incorrect, outdated expression, and my post isn't terribly off-topic given that context. I'm bored, leave me alone ;-)
While I doubt your market research, and your ability to recognize that OS X sells separately from iLife, I understand the source of your confusion.
iLife is bundled with new Apple hardware, so you get a copy when you buy a new iBook, iMac, PowerMac, etc.
Now, maybe you won't use GarageBand, but I'm going to guess that 99.999999% of OS users have some interest in one of iPhoto, iMovie, or iDVD. Ok, mainly iPhoto. But do you really think Apple would be able to drop the price of their machines by much if they excluded a single program that costs less than $50 ?? Why am I answering this troll?
Really, GarageBand is there for semiserious users of iMovie and iDVD- so you can put together a little tune for your home movie project. It's totally useful and doesn't affect the price of the overall package much at all.
You missed the post above yours, "why not use Objective-C?"
If you want cross-platform and (fairly) strong typing, use Java, if you want loose typing and want Linux or OS X, use Objective-C ( GNUStep/Cocoa respectively for UIs ), if you want M$, use Visual Studio C++ or flavor-of-the-moment C#, or flavor-of-the-last-moment VisualBasic, or ( somebody's favorite Wxyz windows-centric development platform here )...
But seriously ( for a moment ), without asking why not use Java, why use C# ? What's the benefit over *anything* else, other than Microsoft is pushing it hard ?
As impressed as I am, and as much as I understand it's "cool project" and "educational value" and "because I can" aspects, I'm still puzzled as to why you'd do this, other than to keep you off the street and off IRC/crack/whatever...
Seriously, though, what kind of game did he write for that display? Text adventure? Two-line pong? What?
On the other hand, at least currently, if you want to call it "Java", no you can't just do your own implementation and call it "Java", you have to ( as far as I know ) also pass the test suite, and ( I think ) pay a fee. I'm sure you have to pay the fee if you're going to use your JVM in a commercial product.
This probably isn't making ( and never was intended to make ) much cash for Sun, though, if they're thinking of essentially doing away with the fees, that's my guess.
That whole Microsoft lawsuit was about keeping JVMs compatable, and this test suite is a key part of ensuring that various implementations are compatable.
Open source Sun's JVM implementation(s) and require any modifications of the code to pass the test suite as well or better than the original(s)? Sounds like a good deal to me...
Does, as in, right now, since the JCK was created.
Oh, and test suites don't introduce bugs.
It's pretty thin on details; all we know is MS is trying to push through some CD copy protection standard without having to specifiy ( yet ) what it is.
or a track, which would otherwise be there already, that is unlockable only on a computer with Windows Longhorn installed?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Somebody mod that guy up as Funny!!!
Or, if you're not trying to be funny, you've clearly never worked in QA, or... maybe you've just explained that there are few GOOD pieces of commercial software...
Anyway, let me assure you that I worked a lot of QA gigs, and in every single one of them, the QA team was dwarfed by the dev team, rarely had good specs to plan from, and found their test time was viewed the most expendable part of the product cycle ( it's the first one to shrink in case of a slip elsewhere ). And those automated tests? Those paths you automate aren't likely to have *glaring* problems- at lest not ones the automated tools can catch - it's just the cases QA didn't have time to code up that'll fail... and of course, you can't automate something until the program is available, can you ? In practice, automated tools are only *really* useful for regression testing.
The most important thing I learned working QA is that the best QA in the world won't save you from a poorly planned or managed project, poor design, coders who don't unit test, or marketing guys who promise the sky and give a fixed do-or-die ship date to go with that sky. Code review is usually better than QA at finding non-design-related bugs. If the coders are good, QA ends up finding usability issues, rather than functionality issues, which is your best-case scenario, even though it means your prototyping and design phase was lacking.
I'd agree with this argument if Office v.X had people flocking to OS X. But that's clearly not the case. People buy Windows for one reason- it's the far-and-away market leader. If they buy hardware, it'll likely be supported; if they find a software package, it'll likely have a version or competitor on Windows. That's the *only* reason to buy Windows, isn't it?
If MS had some way to do it cheaply and thought they'd turn a good profit on it, they'd do a Linux port. They're business men first.
But ask yourself this- what are the sales numbers of any other major commercial Linux application ? When those numbers are large enough, there *will* be MS Office for Linux- right about the time that Windows installed market share slips below 70% or so, I'm guessing, or when Linux desktops make up more than 15% of the business market.
* Up to 3000 feet range (Indoor/Urban environments, @9600 RF data rate)
We're talking about this thing for what reason?
CmdrTaco, please, drink some Jolt and wake up. That's twice in one day you've made me want to smack you around for wasting my time. 9600 baud? Really, why would we want to use this?
To compare this to 802.11b, they have what looks like a version that operates in the 2.4GHz band, guess what? 1500ft range, at 9600 baud.
While I'll admit this thing might have some very specific uses, like remote data collection where you don't have a lot of data, but you want it delivered at regular intervals over a distance where it'd be hard to put in relays or run a real link... but the damn thing costs more than $400, so if you *can* use 802.11g instead, you'll probably want to!
Of course, the devil is in the license, and Sun has historically an 'interesting' take on what "open" means. Maybe it'll be "open" like Microsoft code is "open".
But this announcement does bring up a lot of questions, like: does this mean that they're willing/able to say "no SysV IP in Solaris 10" ? Or that they're someohow able to 'open' some SysV code or IP ( over SCO's nearly-dead body ) ??
It would seem that *one* of these would have to be the case, unless they're buying out SCO or have an interesting Novell agreement or something else is going on...
It does make you wonder, though, if they can do something like this, why did they expand the SCO SysV license ?
Why? Because I apparently read /. more than the current bunch of editors. Or at least I remember the stories. I didn't *need* to search, I saw the headline and thought "idiots, this was a story just a couple of months ago".
Really, do they even bother to *try* to see if a story is a dupe? Or do they purposely dupe stories that got a good amount of traffic in the past ?
While I'm tempted to think they're greedy, it's more realistic to believe they're just forgetful and lazy.
You're *supposed* to stop at red lights, it keeps people from getting killed, that's why they're *red*.
Drivers in Chicago anyway, jeesh...
Like when my son and I watch a Tivoed episode of Oobi or Maisy, or take in Finding Nemo or Potty Time With Bear together... or those evenings after the boy goes to bed, when my wife and I stay up and watch Surreal Life and some good movies ( actually, right now we're working through The Sopranos ).
In all seriousness ( although, maybe sadly, we do all of the above, and my son is an expert on the Noggin and Sesame Street websites ), my post was *designed* for the "Funny" rating it now has... still, it is true that Tivo and Netflix are my two favorite entertainment sources. I'd probably give up my horses first, if only because they're more expensive...
I'm only posting on /. because I'm at work, what else am I going to do? Oh, yea, right...
When they pry the remote out of my cold, dead hands.
I put you there because you've defended ( make nothing of ) at least 3 actions of GW that, really, are kind of a big deal. I notice you didn't say "boo" about my remark regarding detaining US citizens without trial, for example.
Beyond that, do you know what was the president told? He was told that the WTC *and* the Pentagon had been attacked. It was pretty clear. Plenty of information. If it wasn't time for action, if it was something that could have waited until he was finished with the class, he wouldn't have been interrupted. You don't interrupt the president of the US for anything but something really serious. He should have known to get up and go. It's *wacky* that you would downplay that *unless* you're making excuses for the guy.
If you want to look to the source of the division in this country, you need to look no further than Bush himself. At this point, if you aren't totally pissed off at GW by the stuff he's done, you're either not paying attention, or you in a very real way *are* supporting his administration's actions. You don't need to support Moore, or Kerry, or anyone, but unless you support Bush, don't defend him- it's time to stand up for *something*, and it is time to pick a side. You're either for Bush, or you're against him. Pick one. It's sad that you have to, but that's reality.
Don't defend Bush's actions and whine about it when someone mistakes you for a Bush supporter. You're defending the man- that's support by definition.
Actually, holding *some* sort of a press conference would have been reasonable, but really, I'm puzzled by the idea that he might not have decided to just stand up, appologize to the class, say that he has important business to tend to, and leave. What did he do instead? What would *you* have done? Just sat there?
Moore didn't portray the event so much as he showed actual footage of it taking place. Actually, he spared the audience much of the ( extremely uncomfortable ) seven minutes.
That Moore showed it was just predictable. That you'd think Bush's reaction to news that the WTC was blown up is to sit for seven minutes is a BFD-class molehill is what's bizarre. I suppose detaining US citizens without access to a lawyer is a BFD-class molehill as well... as is shuttling the Bin Laden family out of the US while other commercial traffic is grounded... no, you're not a Bush supporter at all ;-)
I'm encouraging everyong to read this book. These are some pretty damn big molehills.
If you'd open your eyes, or even read Franken's book, you'd know that Clinton did a *lot* to combat Al-Queda and middle eastern terrorists- the notion that he did nothing is just another Bush administration lie. You remember that van bomb that went of in the basement of the WTC?? Where are the guys responsible? Oh, that's right, in jail, caught by the administration that "did nothing".
Using the lack of successful attacks on US soil as evidence of a "successful" war on terror is about as brilliant as ignoring the estate tax when talking about tax cuts. Or as honest as saying a tax cut biased towards the top 1% income bracket is "across-the-board".
Let's get one thing straight: you and I agree on the notion of a flat tax with an exemption for the very poor. But that's not something the Bush administration would go for, because funding their defense projects under such a scheme would mean leaving the flat tax at too high a rate. Also, your grip on the concept of "across-the-board" seems pretty loose, at best... at worst, you're repeating a lie, at best, you're playing fast-and-loose with a term.
I'm not trying to change your mind, I'm just asking you if you aren't maybe being just a little bit intellectually dishonest when you say "across-the-board"...
Care to refute analysis provided by a previous post which indicates you have the facts completely wrong? According to that chart, the top 1% of earners got a 5% tax reduction, and the *most* any other income group saw was a 1.4% reduction!
I'm sorry, I want to be really fair about this, but in any analysis, even percentage-paid-based, the majority of this administration's tax cuts ( especially if you include the estate tax ) are heavily weighted towards the very, very wealthy.
Ever get the feeling you've been lied to? I don't suppose you'd like to read "Lies and the Lying Liers Who Tell Them" for an amusing analysis of GW's twisted logic on this topic, which you've apparently decided to take as truth? Every Bush supporter and Fox News watcher should read it...
I do believe the war on terror is the single most important issue of the day- and I believe invading Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror, and that GW is the last guy we want in office while trying to hunt down a Bin Laden! WHY would you think this guy is good at getting rid of terrorists?!? So far, he's done little more than provide a fertile breeding ground for terrorists in Iraq... and used Bill Clinton's army to drive Al-Queda in Afganistan into hiding, something *any* administration would have done...
Isn't the point that anything that could even *remotely* be considered to be related to national security already is exempt from FOIA requests?
Please enlighten me if this exemption somehow doesn't apply to data from commercial satellite providers already; I could be wrong. But the point of TFA does seem to be that the recommendation is over-reaching because it would cut off access to public information without justification.
Maybe the proposal just needs an "iff such information being available could threaten national security" cop-out, er I mean clarification ?
I may never understand why... but then, lots of people bought Windows XP, there seem to be some decisions people make that are just hard to understand...
And how exactly are their developers supposed to make money?
Why would I want to write a program for the Sidekick, exactly, given that Danger could cut off my access to it, or decide to not give me access at all?
I'd love to know the answers to those questions... if there was a way to make money in the space, I'm sure there are some apps I could throw together for this thing, especially if the best non-obvious example app he can think of is the "World Clock"!!
Then there's that 'new' lucrative Java Games area... which I guess is lucrative if you can get someone to buy your startup ;-)
And really, if I can play BattleZone with the dual analog controls on my PS2 dualshock controller? I'd *rather* play it on the console... this and the Sonic Mega Collection are going on my xmas list, right next to GTA: San Andreas, of course...