Most mobile manufacturers make both a GSM and CDMA version of their popular handsets. This is just part of the business in the US, and the Apple's lack of a CDMA iPhone is due more to a lack of a business relationship with Verizon than technical problems.
Year-over-year is the most common metric for sales. Products like the iPhone have much bigger sales during the Christmas season, so that's the metric you want to use to get a sense of what's going on. If Apple were flogging quarterly changes it would be a red flag for a stock analyst.
Raytheon may have a long history of making stuff that hits targets, but commercial shippers don't have a long history of paying $100m for devices that hit stuff.
I have an old Enfield.303 with a steel butt-plate. Believe me, you could drive a nail with it. Whenever I pick it up I have to wonder if my forbears weren't a hell of a lot stronger than I am.
They already do convoys. The problem is it raises costs for the shippers since they have to wait around for the convoy to form up, and it limits their maximum speed. A lot of companies are resigned to doing it, but a lot of them aren't.
One defense is the Force 80 squirt gun with a 3-inch nozzle that can send 1,400 gallons a minute 100 yards in any direction.
Oh yeah, They must feel pretty safe bringing a water cannon to a gun fight. Do they get Super Soakers in case the pirates manage to get on the ship?
100 yards. Hmm, let me see here. The effective range of an AK-47 is rated at 400m, though it can kill you out to about a kilometer on a lucky shot. Then we have the RPG-7, which has an effective range out to about 500m for stationary targets and 300m for moving targets. I'm not really sure what a container ship counts as in this context. Either a "mostly stationary" or "barely moving" target, I suppose. Call it 400m, then.
For comparison, the M-2 Browning machine gun has a rated effective range of 1800m.
Hudson: "How do I get out of this chickenshit outfit?"
To ensure MySQL's survival, he wants to fork from the official version -- using his company Monty Program Ab to create what he calls a MySQL "Fedora" project. This raises the larger question of who really owns a commercial open software application: the corporate copyright holders, or the community?"
That's what all the lawyering over the license text is all about. This question is one of the more settled questions in the industry.
What do you mean, "eventually"? I never pay more than twenty bucks for a game on Steam. I bought Portal for $5 and Deus Ex for $9.99. Sure, new releases are still $40 or $50, but who's in the driver's seat? If you don't like the price, buy a different game. They'll get the message.
I'm not buying it. There was no "total surrender" of Democrats during the Bush administration. If anyone surrendered it was the Republicans, going along with such huge increases in the budget. The idea Bush had that kind of information on enough elected Democrats to actually make a difference is a bit silly.
It looks from the circumstances like Bush and Gonzales more or less bought her support by promising not to prosecute. It really says something about how appalling Gonzalez was that he not only made Ashcroft look sane but now even out of office he is continuing to make Ashcroft look better just by comparison.
For all his quirks (like early-morning prayer sessions and covering up statues), Ashcroft was one of the better AGs we've had in recent years. Gonzo was more on the other side of of the scale. But circumstantial evidence isn't the same thing as phone transcripts - there can be a lot of reasons, legal and otherwise, for the AG to intervene in this kind of case. Bush was, in general, very reluctant to prosecute Democratic politicians because he was afraid people would assume the prosecutions were partisan in nature. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is "Cold Cash" Jefferson from New Orleans. I expect some of the backlog will get cleared out this year as Obama can't be accused of partisanship for prosecuting Democrats.
They didn't "hold out" seats as bribes. They just offered to lobby Pelosi to give her the seat. With her experience she might have gotten it anyway - she was probably best qualified.
She can't very well hope to explain the entire conversation away, though. Any time you end a phone call with "this conversation never happened" it's hard to play innocent after the fact.
The bullshit headlines probably come mostly from j-school grads reading actual science papers.
As to why we haven't seen it in the real world? I'm not surprised. There's already an existing method to create solar cells, so for a new scheme to actually hit the market you have to solve problems with manufacturing and lifespan. If your vastly more efficient solar cell requires plutonium to function it probably won't amount to more than a lab curiosity.
Bullshit. The great depression was shortened specifically because of Roosevelt's spending plans.
Yeah, that's what they told me in grade school as well. Turns out there's absolutely no evidence to support that proposition. And, as a minor correction, it was Hoover who actually opened up the spigot, for all the good it did his legacy.
Of course, as we all know, it was WWII that finally kicked the US out of the depression. But guess what? The government spending as part of supporting WWII was *Kensian economic stimulus*. Quite literally, the government spent its way out of recession, injecting massive amounts of dollars into the economy, creating manufacturing jobs and so forth in order to support the war effort. And no one can credibly deny that (although I'm sure you'll try).
Of course I can credibly deny it. It's wrong. The fact of the matter is WW II only ended the great depression because it left the US as the only world industrial power. We spent the next decade making stuff for everyone else as the rebuilt factories and infrastructure destroyed in the war. Had that not been the case we would have slid right back into recession/depression until the next upswing of the business cycle. That's what I meant about rain dancing. Keynesians see the economy go up and think "Yay! We did that." No, you didn't.
Of course we can end the current recession by similarly bombing out the rest of the world's industrial capacity. They probably won't appreciate it very much, though.
Oh, I understand Keynesian theory. There's a reason it was considered discredited for decades - it doesn't work. Never has. It helps the economy the same way rain dances help make it rain - eventually water falls from the sky and you say "look, my rain dance worked!". Japan stimulated the hell out of their economy in the '90s and all they have to show for it is an enormous public debt and a bunch of infrastructure they can't afford to maintain properly. Politicians love Keynes because it gives them an excuse to spend like there's no tomorrow while at the same time claiming to be doing the prudent thing. Obama isn't even spending money on the sorts of things Keynes would have advised like the Japanese did, you know, roads and dams and such. He's spending it on things like boosting teacher salaries and bailing out spendthrift states.
Besides which, the only time we ever, ever even get close to a balanced budget is when the economy booms so wildly Congress underestimes tax receipts. That's what happened in 2000, and as soon as they realized what was going on they went on a drunken spending spree. Even if you accept the questionable premise that it's a good idea to take on debt during a recession, the way democratic (small "d") politics works it's just a recipe for a large long-term debt. With all that entails, like currency devaluation.
"Stimulus" was taking the easy way out. I could have respected him a lot more if he said "the fastest way out of this recession is for the government to do nothing," which I admit is political suicide even though it's true. I wouldn't have been too upset if he'd tried to rein in the worst excesses. But he didn't even try.
Even the very small wages they pay to people who crack captchas is enough to deter spamming on all but the most lucrative sites. This is no threat to the vast majority of the internet.
On the other hand, I'm glad that he's put and end to Gitmo...
He's done no such thing. He's simply claims to have a timetable, sort of, to close Gitmo. There are lots of thorny issues to be resolved before that facility is closed, and Obama hasn't done anything to resolve them yet.
In any event, he's still a dramatic improvement on the last guy. He'd have to work pretty hard not to be.
I keep seeing people clinging to this desperate delusion. So far he's no improvement over Bush's first ten weeks. Not by a long shot.
I'm not a chemist, but I suspect removing CO2 from the atmosphere isn't the cheapest way to produce it on an industrial scale. If the tax credit was done away with and Coke started getting its CO2 from, say, natural gas, would that make you happy?
I agree with this. Your anonymity is yours to maintain, and as long as the government official doesn't abuse his office to discover who the blogger is there's no problem. Just as you are free to expose secrets of government officials (like John Edwards' love child), government officials are free to expose yours as a private citizen.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody has a gun to his head. ATT and Verizon offer a service which people can purchase or not depending on their own situation. What is the problem?
Most mobile manufacturers make both a GSM and CDMA version of their popular handsets. This is just part of the business in the US, and the Apple's lack of a CDMA iPhone is due more to a lack of a business relationship with Verizon than technical problems.
Year-over-year is the most common metric for sales. Products like the iPhone have much bigger sales during the Christmas season, so that's the metric you want to use to get a sense of what's going on. If Apple were flogging quarterly changes it would be a red flag for a stock analyst.
Raytheon may have a long history of making stuff that hits targets, but commercial shippers don't have a long history of paying $100m for devices that hit stuff.
I have an old Enfield .303 with a steel butt-plate. Believe me, you could drive a nail with it. Whenever I pick it up I have to wonder if my forbears weren't a hell of a lot stronger than I am.
They already do convoys. The problem is it raises costs for the shippers since they have to wait around for the convoy to form up, and it limits their maximum speed. A lot of companies are resigned to doing it, but a lot of them aren't.
One defense is the Force 80 squirt gun with a 3-inch nozzle that can send 1,400 gallons a minute 100 yards in any direction.
Oh yeah, They must feel pretty safe bringing a water cannon to a gun fight. Do they get Super Soakers in case the pirates manage to get on the ship?
100 yards. Hmm, let me see here. The effective range of an AK-47 is rated at 400m, though it can kill you out to about a kilometer on a lucky shot. Then we have the RPG-7, which has an effective range out to about 500m for stationary targets and 300m for moving targets. I'm not really sure what a container ship counts as in this context. Either a "mostly stationary" or "barely moving" target, I suppose. Call it 400m, then.
For comparison, the M-2 Browning machine gun has a rated effective range of 1800m.
Hudson: "How do I get out of this chickenshit outfit?"
To ensure MySQL's survival, he wants to fork from the official version -- using his company Monty Program Ab to create what he calls a MySQL "Fedora" project. This raises the larger question of who really owns a commercial open software application: the corporate copyright holders, or the community?"
That's what all the lawyering over the license text is all about. This question is one of the more settled questions in the industry.
What do you mean, "eventually"? I never pay more than twenty bucks for a game on Steam. I bought Portal for $5 and Deus Ex for $9.99. Sure, new releases are still $40 or $50, but who's in the driver's seat? If you don't like the price, buy a different game. They'll get the message.
Well, the fact she didn't actually get the position would argue for the former, I think.
I'm not buying it. There was no "total surrender" of Democrats during the Bush administration. If anyone surrendered it was the Republicans, going along with such huge increases in the budget. The idea Bush had that kind of information on enough elected Democrats to actually make a difference is a bit silly.
Didn't you guys reelect him after they found $10,000 in his freezer. Jeez.
It looks from the circumstances like Bush and Gonzales more or less bought her support by promising not to prosecute. It really says something about how appalling Gonzalez was that he not only made Ashcroft look sane but now even out of office he is continuing to make Ashcroft look better just by comparison.
For all his quirks (like early-morning prayer sessions and covering up statues), Ashcroft was one of the better AGs we've had in recent years. Gonzo was more on the other side of of the scale. But circumstantial evidence isn't the same thing as phone transcripts - there can be a lot of reasons, legal and otherwise, for the AG to intervene in this kind of case. Bush was, in general, very reluctant to prosecute Democratic politicians because he was afraid people would assume the prosecutions were partisan in nature. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is "Cold Cash" Jefferson from New Orleans. I expect some of the backlog will get cleared out this year as Obama can't be accused of partisanship for prosecuting Democrats.
They didn't "hold out" seats as bribes. They just offered to lobby Pelosi to give her the seat. With her experience she might have gotten it anyway - she was probably best qualified.
She can't very well hope to explain the entire conversation away, though. Any time you end a phone call with "this conversation never happened" it's hard to play innocent after the fact.
Yeah. The FBI may have had a warrant to do this, but it's hard to believe they didn't already have the trojan ready to go.
The bullshit headlines probably come mostly from j-school grads reading actual science papers.
As to why we haven't seen it in the real world? I'm not surprised. There's already an existing method to create solar cells, so for a new scheme to actually hit the market you have to solve problems with manufacturing and lifespan. If your vastly more efficient solar cell requires plutonium to function it probably won't amount to more than a lab curiosity.
Bullshit. The great depression was shortened specifically because of Roosevelt's spending plans.
Yeah, that's what they told me in grade school as well. Turns out there's absolutely no evidence to support that proposition. And, as a minor correction, it was Hoover who actually opened up the spigot, for all the good it did his legacy.
Of course, as we all know, it was WWII that finally kicked the US out of the depression. But guess what? The government spending as part of supporting WWII was *Kensian economic stimulus*. Quite literally, the government spent its way out of recession, injecting massive amounts of dollars into the economy, creating manufacturing jobs and so forth in order to support the war effort. And no one can credibly deny that (although I'm sure you'll try).
Of course I can credibly deny it. It's wrong. The fact of the matter is WW II only ended the great depression because it left the US as the only world industrial power. We spent the next decade making stuff for everyone else as the rebuilt factories and infrastructure destroyed in the war. Had that not been the case we would have slid right back into recession/depression until the next upswing of the business cycle. That's what I meant about rain dancing. Keynesians see the economy go up and think "Yay! We did that." No, you didn't.
Of course we can end the current recession by similarly bombing out the rest of the world's industrial capacity. They probably won't appreciate it very much, though.
Oh, I understand Keynesian theory. There's a reason it was considered discredited for decades - it doesn't work. Never has. It helps the economy the same way rain dances help make it rain - eventually water falls from the sky and you say "look, my rain dance worked!". Japan stimulated the hell out of their economy in the '90s and all they have to show for it is an enormous public debt and a bunch of infrastructure they can't afford to maintain properly. Politicians love Keynes because it gives them an excuse to spend like there's no tomorrow while at the same time claiming to be doing the prudent thing. Obama isn't even spending money on the sorts of things Keynes would have advised like the Japanese did, you know, roads and dams and such. He's spending it on things like boosting teacher salaries and bailing out spendthrift states.
Besides which, the only time we ever, ever even get close to a balanced budget is when the economy booms so wildly Congress underestimes tax receipts. That's what happened in 2000, and as soon as they realized what was going on they went on a drunken spending spree. Even if you accept the questionable premise that it's a good idea to take on debt during a recession, the way democratic (small "d") politics works it's just a recipe for a large long-term debt. With all that entails, like currency devaluation.
"Stimulus" was taking the easy way out. I could have respected him a lot more if he said "the fastest way out of this recession is for the government to do nothing," which I admit is political suicide even though it's true. I wouldn't have been too upset if he'd tried to rein in the worst excesses. But he didn't even try.
What did he do that was an abomination in the first ten weeks?
In eight years of Bush we got an extra 400B added to the deficit, mostly costs relating to the war.
In ten weeks Obama has managed to create an ongoing trillion dollar yearly deficit. Yes, he inherited a bad situation. And then he made it 10x worse.
Even the very small wages they pay to people who crack captchas is enough to deter spamming on all but the most lucrative sites. This is no threat to the vast majority of the internet.
On the other hand, I'm glad that he's put and end to Gitmo...
He's done no such thing. He's simply claims to have a timetable, sort of, to close Gitmo. There are lots of thorny issues to be resolved before that facility is closed, and Obama hasn't done anything to resolve them yet.
In any event, he's still a dramatic improvement on the last guy. He'd have to work pretty hard not to be.
I keep seeing people clinging to this desperate delusion. So far he's no improvement over Bush's first ten weeks. Not by a long shot.
Oh, sure, it's neat-o. But you could probably afford hundreds of grad students to do the work for the same price.
I'm not a chemist, but I suspect removing CO2 from the atmosphere isn't the cheapest way to produce it on an industrial scale. If the tax credit was done away with and Coke started getting its CO2 from, say, natural gas, would that make you happy?
I agree with this. Your anonymity is yours to maintain, and as long as the government official doesn't abuse his office to discover who the blogger is there's no problem. Just as you are free to expose secrets of government officials (like John Edwards' love child), government officials are free to expose yours as a private citizen.