Because generally speaking, neither of these groups produce any value per-capita compared to the middle class. The middle class does, but they're generally working too hard to notice when they get fucked by politicians on both sides until it's too late.
While that may be true (perhaps I should've used a Bundy Ranch-esque illustration to fire people up instead), quit dancing around semantically. Left-leaning new sites absolutely refuse to take a stance against Islamic terrorism because it doesn't fit in their worldview and it makes their readership highly uncomfortable, yet they have zero problems pointing out every conceivable flaw imaginable (again, perceived or otherwise) with Christian groups they've been programmed to ridicule and hate. Period. I mean, the President just did it again this morning at the National Prayer Breakfast. There, is that clear enough for you?
...that if a right-leaning group committed "atrocities" anywhere (perceived or otherwise), MSNBC, Salon, Mother Jones and their ilk would have it on front page infinite loop 24 x7. Our society needs to quit playing partisan games and starting calling out evil, regardless of who the perpetrators are.
As someone that owns a high end imaging studio that shoot "big stuff" every day for a living, we would love it if someone came along and built a sensor using a full 4x5 capture area. It hasn't happened since Better Light and their digital scan backs (and we still use and love our Super 8K-HS), which is now 15 year old technology. The current state of the art is the Phase One 80 megapixel digital back, and Phase One has cornered a very large percentage of the medium format digital market at this point. Both the DSLR and medium format guys are going to start to run up against physical limitations inherent to the sizes of their capture areas, including sensitivity (evidenced by this new Canon's relatively low ISO ratings), and, most importantly, the details of what the optics can resolve. If you want to capture more actual *image information* and not just pixels, you need to scale things up. My guess is that that 50 MP Canon will just make it that much more obvious how soft most lenses are at the corners.
To build what you describe, someone would have to pay for the R & D to design and fab a chip that large. That's no trivial effort. Only a few foundries in the world right now are even capable of producing it. I believe Phase One is using Sony silicon in their latest iterations; previously, they had used DALSA for awhile. Yield per wafer is obviously way lower too with a monster sensor -- maybe two at the most? These guys look at the potential market and have to cost-justify it that way, and the market is just too damn small, unfortunately. If the selling price is six figures (and I don't see how it couldn't be, given that a new Phase One IQ280 is $50K), how many potential buyers are really out there? I just don't see it happening unless someone like the Federal government steps in and commissions their own cameras, like it did with Hasselblad back in the 60s for the space program. With the NSA and Homeland Security's "needs," you never know.
...but we already know that Comcast and Verizon are the Antichrist in corporate form. I am concerned about the details of the implementation but this *should* be a very positive thing for those who actually use the Internet instead of just acting as its tolltakers.
The problem is, and one of the main reasons that Uber and other rideshare companies exist at all, is that gov't took things a step beyond simple regulation, at least in the US: they implemented full-bore artificial scarcity via the ridiculous, corrupt medallion system. These medallions act as both a completely unnecessary limit on competition as well as on the total number of available cabs. They are a lose-lose for the consumer and all the folks complaining about Uber et al have never been able to come up with a good reason for keeping the medallion system, which is one of the main reasons why taxi service sucks so bad in the US. We can certainly have regulation without the gov't limiting the number of vendors in the market -- that's the way it's done in, you know, just about every other industry out there. Why should the cab companies and taxi unions be any different?
Well, considering the armed insurrection at Ferguson, and the raft of armed "activists" ready to confront law enforcement while using peaceful protesters as human shields while burning the property of completely innocent people to the ground, it would be extremely bizarre if they weren't running training exercises. One could say that they would be negligent if they weren't...
All medallions do is create taxi cartels, barriers to entry for others wishing to participate in the market, a complete lack of competition, and insane profits for the medallion owners (not the drivers). It is a system that just begs for abuse and it's disgusting that this type of situation is not only condoned, but advocated by our municipal governments. It is only because of the ride share apps that these dinosaurs are finally being wiped out by their own well-deserved asteroid. http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
So, what's to stop an insurance company from working with the ride share companies to offer up commercial coverage to anyone driving using the company's ride share app? Some smart insurer is going to go down this path and make a lot of money. Certainly, with almost a million drivers, someone like Uber would have the clout to negotiate the lowest commercial rates on the planet. That would be absolutely no different than what taxi unions have been doing for decades, just at a larger scale. The only difference in this case, apparently, is that it's OK when a union working under a gov't sanctioned artificial scarcity (medallions) does it, and absolutely horrific and unfair when an evil corp like Uber does it.
Purely anecdotal . . . search the Net and you'll find many more stories attesting to the exact opposite. And good for her . . . that's her choice. My choice (and the choice of many others) is to never take a taxi again. The insane growth of the ride share industry, however, is proof positive that people are readily embracing any alternative to the gov't-sanctioned artificial scarcity known as medallion-based traditional taxi services.
Do I understand the need for insurance and regulation? Sure. But the people have very clearly spoken on this one. They *love* ride share services. They love everything about them -- the convenience, the cost (surge pricing notwithstanding), the experience, you name it. Ride shares are superior to and more efficient than traditional taxis in every way. Gov't needs to quit playing the fear mongering "Uber drivers will rape you" card and figure out how to facilitate what the people want rather than cow-towing to medallion-sanctioned monopolies. Scream all you want but the genie is out of the bottle and he ain't going back in.
...just a few few days ago? How do you like him now? That's right, he's still smearing turds all over the Constitution, and having him gone will be one of the best things about Obama's terms finally ending.
Interesting that there's no mention of Nikon's top 36MP chip in their new D810.
However, even that's wimpy. Take look at any of Phase One's medium format digital backs in 50, 60, or 80 megapixels, with the world's highest resolution and widest dynamic range in any commercially available camera system. They're generally used with the world's best German lenses, like Schneider and Rodenstock This is what pro fashion, product, landscape, and repro shooters use when money is no object.
Prove it. Show some quantifiable metric that supports what you postulate, and attributes it *purely* to diversity. Until then, diversity is nothing but a feel-good buzzword at best, and at worst, a legalized method of enforcing workforce sexism and racism.
you are going to get burned by the orgs that know they can do better.
Better how? Fewer errors per million lines of code better? Higher sales per employee better? Show me a metric besides diversity itself that proves these other orgs you describe are inherently "better." Because unless this quality increase you describe can be defined and measured, and directly attributed to having a diverse workforce, you're going to have a hard time selling this idea to those who might be a bit skeptical.
Why should a technologist business owner do any of this stuff? None of it will inherently improve their business. Hiring the best PERSON for the job will, however.
. . . to rebuild your array when one of these puppies fails?:-( I realize it's progress, but I'm just thinking of the practical realities of using individual drives this big in a NAS.
It doesn't matter how fast how fast your maglev trains go . . . until this tunnel in Baltimore is replaced, it's impossible for trains in the NE Corridor to run that quickly.
When you spike consumption in response to lower prices, the prices just go back up.
As with any commodity, this is only true if supply is static or falling while demand rises. The reason gas prices are currently falling is because supply of available oil is rising, largely due to new sources being made available.
or even simply returned to the public in the form of a rebate
Can you provide any evidence of when this has ever happened with a tax was applied to a commodity? In reality, any surplus will be retained by Big Oil. Lefties need to quit trying to hurt the middle class and working poor with all of these proposed "progressive" taxes that are actually completely regressive, disproportionately affecting those who can least afford to absorb them. How about stripping Big Oil of their subsidies for starters? The Democrats could have easily done this during the first half of Obama's first term, when they held the House, Senate, *and* Presidency, yet they chose to leave those surpluses intact.
What about older people forced to pay for pregnancy coverage they'll never use? What about healthy 20-somethings whose affordable plans (called "junk plans" by liberals, but perfectly adequate coverage for a demographic that very rarely needs anything but coverage in case of catastrophic events) were cancelled even after Obama LIED and said "if you like your insurance, you can keep it?" You don't want to mention those things because it's more regressive taxation from so-called progressives. If you liberals are hell-bent on getting rid of every inequality you think you see, why do you insist on taking money from your fellow middle-class Americans to do it instead of from the big corps you claim to despise so much? THAT's why ObamaCare is so damn unpopular, and part of the reason the Democrats will get wiped out in next week's elections. People are sick of your bullshit.
It's also important to remember that not all inner city gun violence is officially "gang-related" (as in, involved someone who was ACTUALLY a member of MS-13 or some other Gang (capital "G") that's being followed by the researchers). Here in the Baltimore Metro area, the rate of handgun violence is orders of magnitude higher in the city compared to the surrounding suburbs, and the motives are almost always drug-related (even if those involved weren't actually part of an official "gang"). Of course, both Chicago and Baltimore have some of the strictest gun laws in the country . . . clearly the answer is to tighten those even further and ignore the root causes of the violence.
I'm not sure why the GP was modded offtopic as the point is quite pertinent. These shortfalls are unfortunately typical of how local, state and Federal gov't in the US budget and spend money by "backing into" numbers. The process goes: 1) an administration or legislature comes up with some new program, initiative, or project that will cost an ocean of money way outside of the current budget allowance. 2) to fund their initiative, they hire their own "experts" to come up with absolutely batshit-crazy projections related to the revenue-generating mechanisms like new taxes, toll increases, etc. which don't account for realities like diminishing returns (i.e., small states with close geographic neighbors can only increase cigarette taxes so much before smokers just buy their death sticks in another adjacent state. For another example: you can only raise a toll on a bridge or tunnel so much until it's literally cheaper for people to take the long way around and gross revenues drop as you continue to increase the tax.). 3) the projected revenues in reality are many times more than the actual revenues that are collected. 4) Politicians spend the money they wanted anyway and then scream that they need to raise taxes to make up for the shortfalls due to their poor / bullshit planning or they'll be forced to shut down schools, libraries, etc. ("We need to do this for the children!") It's a scam that serves all 50 states well in varying degrees.
Slashdot Mirror
Because generally speaking, neither of these groups produce any value per-capita compared to the middle class. The middle class does, but they're generally working too hard to notice when they get fucked by politicians on both sides until it's too late.
While that may be true (perhaps I should've used a Bundy Ranch-esque illustration to fire people up instead), quit dancing around semantically. Left-leaning new sites absolutely refuse to take a stance against Islamic terrorism because it doesn't fit in their worldview and it makes their readership highly uncomfortable, yet they have zero problems pointing out every conceivable flaw imaginable (again, perceived or otherwise) with Christian groups they've been programmed to ridicule and hate. Period. I mean, the President just did it again this morning at the National Prayer Breakfast. There, is that clear enough for you?
...that if a right-leaning group committed "atrocities" anywhere (perceived or otherwise), MSNBC, Salon, Mother Jones and their ilk would have it on front page infinite loop 24 x7. Our society needs to quit playing partisan games and starting calling out evil, regardless of who the perpetrators are.
As someone that owns a high end imaging studio that shoot "big stuff" every day for a living, we would love it if someone came along and built a sensor using a full 4x5 capture area. It hasn't happened since Better Light and their digital scan backs (and we still use and love our Super 8K-HS), which is now 15 year old technology. The current state of the art is the Phase One 80 megapixel digital back, and Phase One has cornered a very large percentage of the medium format digital market at this point. Both the DSLR and medium format guys are going to start to run up against physical limitations inherent to the sizes of their capture areas, including sensitivity (evidenced by this new Canon's relatively low ISO ratings), and, most importantly, the details of what the optics can resolve. If you want to capture more actual *image information* and not just pixels, you need to scale things up. My guess is that that 50 MP Canon will just make it that much more obvious how soft most lenses are at the corners.
To build what you describe, someone would have to pay for the R & D to design and fab a chip that large. That's no trivial effort. Only a few foundries in the world right now are even capable of producing it. I believe Phase One is using Sony silicon in their latest iterations; previously, they had used DALSA for awhile. Yield per wafer is obviously way lower too with a monster sensor -- maybe two at the most? These guys look at the potential market and have to cost-justify it that way, and the market is just too damn small, unfortunately. If the selling price is six figures (and I don't see how it couldn't be, given that a new Phase One IQ280 is $50K), how many potential buyers are really out there? I just don't see it happening unless someone like the Federal government steps in and commissions their own cameras, like it did with Hasselblad back in the 60s for the space program. With the NSA and Homeland Security's "needs," you never know.
...but we already know that Comcast and Verizon are the Antichrist in corporate form. I am concerned about the details of the implementation but this *should* be a very positive thing for those who actually use the Internet instead of just acting as its tolltakers.
The problem is, and one of the main reasons that Uber and other rideshare companies exist at all, is that gov't took things a step beyond simple regulation, at least in the US: they implemented full-bore artificial scarcity via the ridiculous, corrupt medallion system. These medallions act as both a completely unnecessary limit on competition as well as on the total number of available cabs. They are a lose-lose for the consumer and all the folks complaining about Uber et al have never been able to come up with a good reason for keeping the medallion system, which is one of the main reasons why taxi service sucks so bad in the US. We can certainly have regulation without the gov't limiting the number of vendors in the market -- that's the way it's done in, you know, just about every other industry out there. Why should the cab companies and taxi unions be any different?
Well, considering the armed insurrection at Ferguson, and the raft of armed "activists" ready to confront law enforcement while using peaceful protesters as human shields while burning the property of completely innocent people to the ground, it would be extremely bizarre if they weren't running training exercises. One could say that they would be negligent if they weren't...
All medallions do is create taxi cartels, barriers to entry for others wishing to participate in the market, a complete lack of competition, and insane profits for the medallion owners (not the drivers). It is a system that just begs for abuse and it's disgusting that this type of situation is not only condoned, but advocated by our municipal governments. It is only because of the ride share apps that these dinosaurs are finally being wiped out by their own well-deserved asteroid. http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
So, what's to stop an insurance company from working with the ride share companies to offer up commercial coverage to anyone driving using the company's ride share app? Some smart insurer is going to go down this path and make a lot of money. Certainly, with almost a million drivers, someone like Uber would have the clout to negotiate the lowest commercial rates on the planet. That would be absolutely no different than what taxi unions have been doing for decades, just at a larger scale. The only difference in this case, apparently, is that it's OK when a union working under a gov't sanctioned artificial scarcity (medallions) does it, and absolutely horrific and unfair when an evil corp like Uber does it.
Purely anecdotal . . . search the Net and you'll find many more stories attesting to the exact opposite. And good for her . . . that's her choice. My choice (and the choice of many others) is to never take a taxi again. The insane growth of the ride share industry, however, is proof positive that people are readily embracing any alternative to the gov't-sanctioned artificial scarcity known as medallion-based traditional taxi services.
Do I understand the need for insurance and regulation? Sure. But the people have very clearly spoken on this one. They *love* ride share services. They love everything about them -- the convenience, the cost (surge pricing notwithstanding), the experience, you name it. Ride shares are superior to and more efficient than traditional taxis in every way. Gov't needs to quit playing the fear mongering "Uber drivers will rape you" card and figure out how to facilitate what the people want rather than cow-towing to medallion-sanctioned monopolies. Scream all you want but the genie is out of the bottle and he ain't going back in.
...just a few few days ago? How do you like him now? That's right, he's still smearing turds all over the Constitution, and having him gone will be one of the best things about Obama's terms finally ending.
Interesting that there's no mention of Nikon's top 36MP chip in their new D810.
However, even that's wimpy. Take look at any of Phase One's medium format digital backs in 50, 60, or 80 megapixels, with the world's highest resolution and widest dynamic range in any commercially available camera system. They're generally used with the world's best German lenses, like Schneider and Rodenstock This is what pro fashion, product, landscape, and repro shooters use when money is no object.
Prove it. Show some quantifiable metric that supports what you postulate, and attributes it *purely* to diversity. Until then, diversity is nothing but a feel-good buzzword at best, and at worst, a legalized method of enforcing workforce sexism and racism.
And the evil he committed greatly outweighed the few good deeds he might have accomplished. History will judge Holder the same.
you are going to get burned by the orgs that know they can do better.
Better how? Fewer errors per million lines of code better? Higher sales per employee better? Show me a metric besides diversity itself that proves these other orgs you describe are inherently "better." Because unless this quality increase you describe can be defined and measured, and directly attributed to having a diverse workforce, you're going to have a hard time selling this idea to those who might be a bit skeptical.
Why should a technologist business owner do any of this stuff? None of it will inherently improve their business. Hiring the best PERSON for the job will, however.
. . . to rebuild your array when one of these puppies fails? :-( I realize it's progress, but I'm just thinking of the practical realities of using individual drives this big in a NAS.
It doesn't matter how fast how fast your maglev trains go . . . until this tunnel in Baltimore is replaced, it's impossible for trains in the NE Corridor to run that quickly.
When you spike consumption in response to lower prices, the prices just go back up.
As with any commodity, this is only true if supply is static or falling while demand rises. The reason gas prices are currently falling is because supply of available oil is rising, largely due to new sources being made available.
or even simply returned to the public in the form of a rebate
Can you provide any evidence of when this has ever happened with a tax was applied to a commodity? In reality, any surplus will be retained by Big Oil. Lefties need to quit trying to hurt the middle class and working poor with all of these proposed "progressive" taxes that are actually completely regressive, disproportionately affecting those who can least afford to absorb them. How about stripping Big Oil of their subsidies for starters? The Democrats could have easily done this during the first half of Obama's first term, when they held the House, Senate, *and* Presidency, yet they chose to leave those surpluses intact.
To be fair, neither did the people who passed it.
What about older people forced to pay for pregnancy coverage they'll never use? What about healthy 20-somethings whose affordable plans (called "junk plans" by liberals, but perfectly adequate coverage for a demographic that very rarely needs anything but coverage in case of catastrophic events) were cancelled even after Obama LIED and said "if you like your insurance, you can keep it?" You don't want to mention those things because it's more regressive taxation from so-called progressives. If you liberals are hell-bent on getting rid of every inequality you think you see, why do you insist on taking money from your fellow middle-class Americans to do it instead of from the big corps you claim to despise so much? THAT's why ObamaCare is so damn unpopular, and part of the reason the Democrats will get wiped out in next week's elections. People are sick of your bullshit.
Members of the Society of Jesus (SJ) -- the Jesuits -- have long embraced science . . . in fact, they have made numerous significant contributions to the development of science. Science and Christianity, and particularly science and Catholicism, are certainly not mutually exclusive.
See page #27: https://portal.chicagopolice.o...
It's also important to remember that not all inner city gun violence is officially "gang-related" (as in, involved someone who was ACTUALLY a member of MS-13 or some other Gang (capital "G") that's being followed by the researchers). Here in the Baltimore Metro area, the rate of handgun violence is orders of magnitude higher in the city compared to the surrounding suburbs, and the motives are almost always drug-related (even if those involved weren't actually part of an official "gang"). Of course, both Chicago and Baltimore have some of the strictest gun laws in the country . . . clearly the answer is to tighten those even further and ignore the root causes of the violence.
I'm not sure why the GP was modded offtopic as the point is quite pertinent. These shortfalls are unfortunately typical of how local, state and Federal gov't in the US budget and spend money by "backing into" numbers. The process goes: 1) an administration or legislature comes up with some new program, initiative, or project that will cost an ocean of money way outside of the current budget allowance. 2) to fund their initiative, they hire their own "experts" to come up with absolutely batshit-crazy projections related to the revenue-generating mechanisms like new taxes, toll increases, etc. which don't account for realities like diminishing returns (i.e., small states with close geographic neighbors can only increase cigarette taxes so much before smokers just buy their death sticks in another adjacent state. For another example: you can only raise a toll on a bridge or tunnel so much until it's literally cheaper for people to take the long way around and gross revenues drop as you continue to increase the tax.). 3) the projected revenues in reality are many times more than the actual revenues that are collected. 4) Politicians spend the money they wanted anyway and then scream that they need to raise taxes to make up for the shortfalls due to their poor / bullshit planning or they'll be forced to shut down schools, libraries, etc. ("We need to do this for the children!") It's a scam that serves all 50 states well in varying degrees.