Your math is good, but not sure I agree with the logic. I completely agree with the idea that the guy at $20k should not be taxed below poverty level, but after that why should a person be penalized because he makes more money. 17% is 17% no matter how you slice it. A person should be taxed more because he made more money (theoretically worked harder and was more successful). If you penalize people for making more money you reduce the incentives to go to college, be successful, etc.. Eventually it's more difficult to find people to fill skilled positions, or those positions are required to make more money to cover their tax burden (see the health care system).
Eventually the lower income brackets get to pay (at least) their share because the higher bracket people (doctors, lawyers, engineers) pass the costs right down the line. The only long term effect of the tax brackets is to increase the separation between upper and lower class.
While I agree with the grandparent that requesting moderation is annoying (something I completely ignore when I have mod points). A highly disagree in modding someone down just for asking. In general I disagree with modding anyone down at all. Worry more about promoting good posts and not as much about smacking down posts you don't like/agree with.
What did he want them to do? Write the whole thing again from scratch in ASM?
Well, ummm, yeah. Create a new API. Software companies with fewer resources have.
Personally, I have no experience with.NET, and my response isn't a dig at your post. Your point is well taken,.NET may be very good at what it was designed for. The problem is, it's not really anything new. It's a rehashed wrapper around Win32. It may be a great wrapper, but many of the inherent problems with the Win32 API are still there.
In the long term, I think this will be what will kill Microsoft. They can't come up with anything new unless a competitor holds them to the fire (e.g. firefox). One of these days someone is going to beat them to the punch on something vital and it will be very bad for them. In the software industry, like most other industries, you have to be moving forward, inventing and innovating to stay alive. Microsoft has a reputation of just serving up warmed-up leftovers, and that doesn't cut it.
Ahhh, but you ignore the fact that Christianity is exactly the same.
No, Christianity is not the same, in fact it's the opposite. The Christian Bible teaches love, tolerance, acceptance ("turn the other cheek", "Love your neighbor", etc..) but Christians, over the centurys have twisted their faith to do bad things. Men can do evil things, and sometimes misguidedly blame Christianity, but the true faith is one of love, peace and charity.
Do you realize that true Islam does not condone terrorism?
I am not sure what your definition of "true Islam" is, but there are very strong writings in the Koran that specifically instruct Muslims to destroy Infidels.
I have been ordered to fight with the people until they say, none has the right to be worshiped but Allah (Hadith 4:196)
Strike terror (into the hearts of ) the enemies of Allah and your enemies (Sura 8:60)
I will instill terror into the hearts of unbelievers. Smite them above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them. It is not you who slay them, it is Allah (Sura 8:12, 17)
I do know there are many Muslims in the world that do not agree with terrorism or take these writings as literal,but many do. The idea that everything that has gone from the 9/11 attacks to now are not a religous war of Muslims vs. an Infidel nation is preposterous and false.
It's pretty evident from this and the cosmological myth in Genesis that the ancient Hebrew tribes had imported the Mesopotomian idea of the heavens being a dome over a flat Earth
Now there's a logical leap. A man observes the Sun stopping in the sky and it's evidence of a flat earth? I think we would all agree that the Sun and the Earth staying in the same relative position is an impossibility (hence why they would call this a miracle), but to say the writer belived the earth was flat because of his statement makes no sense.
Have you have ever watched the sun come UP, or enjoyed a nice SUNSET or asked someone to meet you at HIGH NOON???? If so you must believe in the idea of a flat earth too. The position of the sun is a matter of perspective. If I was out and about one day and noticed the sun was in the same position in the sky for several hours I would report that it had "stopped", even though I know it would have to be the earth that was not moving in relation to the Sun.
Evolutionary theory has no notion of "better" or "worse"
Huh. I thought "Survival of the fittest" was a basic concept of Evoloutionary theory. The organisims with mutations "best" suited to their environment prosper. These mutations become more common and the species "Evolves".
As to Creationism, it's scientifically worthless.
That's true to a point. It's difficult to prove creation, we haven't been able to create anything in controlled setting and no one was there to observe Creation (or whatever happened) so Creationism is "scientifically" worthless.
OTOH, macro-evolution is almost as worthless for the same reasons. Obviously micro-evolution exists and is reproducable in the laboratory, but to jump from the conclusion that to the idea that every living thing came from amoeba is a huge jump. Again, we can't recreate it, the only evidence we have is a fossil record that is at the very least incomplete and difficult to authenticate and no one has been around long enough to see the process in action. The primary reason that Evolutionary Theory is so widely accepted is because the only other idea that fits the facts is Creationism and many people will reject that because it requires belief in some kind of "Supreme Being".
I think everyone is entitled to their personal beliefs, my biggest annoyance with the whole Evolution vs. Creation argument is that there is no definitive way to prove it - at least not definitive enough for me. As you said, Einstein's Theory of General Relativity can be applied to create an atomic bomb, but Evolutionary Theory cannot be applied to show macro-evolution.
Personally my feeling is it's a really stupid thing to argue about. Present the facts, let people draw their conclusions, but don't present this idea of life coming out of some primordial ooze as fact if you can't prove it.
OK, so I was wrong. Thanks for the link though - I think this is a good solution to the problem (from the article):
Only in post-revolution France could an invention be given "free to all the world" and its inventor rewarded with a lifelong pension from the government.
You know this is a topic that comes up here, and is argued about, all the time.
What about case study? We have had patents for what, 200 years? Surely examples can be produced for both the positive and negative aspects of patents. Let's here them.
I'll start out. This is a story I've heard, and I don't have a significant amount of time to research it. From what I understand, George Eastman of Eastman Kodak used the patent system to lock up the photography industry for many, many years. He would wait until one patent was nearly up, modify his product minimally and acquire a new patent. No other company was able to use his technology, so they could never keep up and Kodak dominated Photography for nearly 100 years.
...the only problem would be not going to jail for the virus you patented!
That's a good point, so what if we do it with spyware instead. Write some very annoying spyware, which is perfectly legal, and copyright the whole thing. Then take the anti-spyware vendors (who are often the same people as the anti-virus vendors) to court for violating the copyright under the DMCA.
My previous post wasn't intended as a troll, I was (and am) completely serious. One of the great things about this country is the way our judicial system works in respect to laws. If a stupid law is made, the court system will generally uphold every application of it, at least until the Supreme Court decides it's bogus and overturns it.
Everyone on slashdot cries and moans about the DMCA and the patent system. If some of us would figure out ways to exploit these lame laws to hurt big business I'm sure lobbyists in Washington would be quick to get the law re-written. Besides, if a person could Symantec or McAfee for copyright violation and win, I bet you could get a tidy little sum.
Or better yet, someone should copyright their virus and use the DMCA to sue all the anti-virus companies out of existance when they reverse engineer their copyrighted program.
That's something I'd like to see. Symantec execs being escorted to jail for "Virus Piracy"
Google is a search engine. Yahoo has become much more of a portal site with additional services.
Their webmail is good, their personals are good, their financial tracking is good, their news stories are interesting. I use it often just to check the market, read comics, catch up on the latest Paris Hilton scandal, etc... Of course, if I actually want to find anything or do anything useful I use Google.
While I think that many of us do owe these big names like Linus, etc... I know that personally I owe much more to many of the 'unsung heros'. Guys like:
Seriously, I imagine that's exactly what will happen. When they are worthless enough IBM will buy them and this will all go away. I imagine they will just wait until the price bottoms out.
Umm... the article said no sig required for charges less than $25. So just walk by somebody with a reader asking for a $20 charge. A couple hundred people in a mall? That would add up pretty quickly.
Personally I think this is a stupid idea anyway. I don't have any issues scanning my card, or siging for purchases less than $25. As a consumer, why would I want this technology at all?
I think that's a gross exaggeration of the problem, however it could cost eBay a lot in man-hours auditting the results of every auction since the beginning to determine who is entitled to a refund.
I hope if the court does find for the plaintiff they don't make eBay go to those lengths. I agree the practice is bunk, but would hate to see eBay thrown into bankruptcy over something like this. Make them stop, slap their hand, and move on.
Personally I'm not sure I could live in a world without eBay.
I mostly agree with your comments - but have to disagree with your analysis of Edward James Olmos. I think the character's tension with the president, closing of the tribunals, invasion of Colonial 1, etc.. has been fantastic. I think the idea fits well with the character. He was slated to retire - this was his last command. I see him as someone that was had a fantastic career, but has become obsolete. Between losing his son, new technology reducing his usefulness (this is addressed in early episodes) and the decomissioning of his ship he has become a little unstable and strange. Deep down he's a great man and everyone respects him because of his history, but he's not really the best person to be leading the remnant of humanity on their quest for a new home. I think Olmos lends an incredible humanity to the character.
Interesting. Sounds like they are trying to outlaw one kind of technology and specifically pu that languqage into the law. They can't just say you can't transfer music to another medium for play in a different player - that would violate the ability to actually copy to another CD. OTOH, what If I copy the CD to another CD and then play the copy in a CD player that will play music CDs and CDs with mp3s on them. Is that illegal? If it's not, what If I convert the music to MP3s, write them to a CD and play them in the same player.
Sounds like some lawyers will have a good time at the government's expense over this one.
Slashdot Mirror
Your math is good, but not sure I agree with the logic. I completely agree with the idea that the guy at $20k should not be taxed below poverty level, but after that why should a person be penalized because he makes more money. 17% is 17% no matter how you slice it. A person should be taxed more because he made more money (theoretically worked harder and was more successful). If you penalize people for making more money you reduce the incentives to go to college, be successful, etc.. Eventually it's more difficult to find people to fill skilled positions, or those positions are required to make more money to cover their tax burden (see the health care system).
Eventually the lower income brackets get to pay (at least) their share because the higher bracket people (doctors, lawyers, engineers) pass the costs right down the line. The only long term effect of the tax brackets is to increase the separation between upper and lower class.
The Slashdot moderator guidelines also recommend "Concentrate more on promoting than on demoting."
While I agree with the grandparent that requesting moderation is annoying (something I completely ignore when I have mod points). A highly disagree in modding someone down just for asking. In general I disagree with modding anyone down at all. Worry more about promoting good posts and not as much about smacking down posts you don't like/agree with.
What did he want them to do? Write the whole thing again from scratch in ASM?
.NET, and my response isn't a dig at your post. Your point is well taken, .NET may be very good at what it was designed for. The problem is, it's not really anything new. It's a rehashed wrapper around Win32. It may be a great wrapper, but many of the inherent problems with the Win32 API are still there.
Well, ummm, yeah. Create a new API. Software companies with fewer resources have.
Personally, I have no experience with
In the long term, I think this will be what will kill Microsoft. They can't come up with anything new unless a competitor holds them to the fire (e.g. firefox). One of these days someone is going to beat them to the punch on something vital and it will be very bad for them. In the software industry, like most other industries, you have to be moving forward, inventing and innovating to stay alive. Microsoft has a reputation of just serving up warmed-up leftovers, and that doesn't cut it.
Not to mention Radon levels.
Colorado probably isn't the best place to live if you are worried about radiation.
Ahhh, but you ignore the fact that Christianity is exactly the same.
No, Christianity is not the same, in fact it's the opposite. The Christian Bible teaches love, tolerance, acceptance ("turn the other cheek", "Love your neighbor", etc..) but Christians, over the centurys have twisted their faith to do bad things. Men can do evil things, and sometimes misguidedly blame Christianity, but the true faith is one of love, peace and charity.
Do you realize that true Islam does not condone terrorism?
I am not sure what your definition of "true Islam" is, but there are very strong writings in the Koran that specifically instruct Muslims to destroy Infidels.
I have been ordered to fight with the people until they say, none has the right to be worshiped but Allah (Hadith 4:196)
Strike terror (into the hearts of ) the enemies of Allah and your enemies (Sura 8:60)
I will instill terror into the hearts of unbelievers. Smite them above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them. It is not you who slay them, it is Allah (Sura 8:12, 17)
I do know there are many Muslims in the world that do not agree with terrorism or take these writings as literal,but many do. The idea that everything that has gone from the 9/11 attacks to now are not a religous war of Muslims vs. an Infidel nation is preposterous and false.
It's pretty evident from this and the cosmological myth in Genesis that the ancient Hebrew tribes had imported the Mesopotomian idea of the heavens being a dome over a flat Earth
Now there's a logical leap. A man observes the Sun stopping in the sky and it's evidence of a flat earth? I think we would all agree that the Sun and the Earth staying in the same relative position is an impossibility (hence why they would call this a miracle), but to say the writer belived the earth was flat because of his statement makes no sense.
Have you have ever watched the sun come UP, or enjoyed a nice SUNSET or asked someone to meet you at HIGH NOON???? If so you must believe in the idea of a flat earth too. The position of the sun is a matter of perspective. If I was out and about one day and noticed the sun was in the same position in the sky for several hours I would report that it had "stopped", even though I know it would have to be the earth that was not moving in relation to the Sun.
Evolutionary theory has no notion of "better" or "worse"
Huh. I thought "Survival of the fittest" was a basic concept of Evoloutionary theory. The organisims with mutations "best" suited to their environment prosper. These mutations become more common and the species "Evolves".
As to Creationism, it's scientifically worthless.
That's true to a point. It's difficult to prove creation, we haven't been able to create anything in controlled setting and no one was there to observe Creation (or whatever happened) so Creationism is "scientifically" worthless.
OTOH, macro-evolution is almost as worthless for the same reasons. Obviously micro-evolution exists and is reproducable in the laboratory, but to jump from the conclusion that to the idea that every living thing came from amoeba is a huge jump. Again, we can't recreate it, the only evidence we have is a fossil record that is at the very least incomplete and difficult to authenticate and no one has been around long enough to see the process in action. The primary reason that Evolutionary Theory is so widely accepted is because the only other idea that fits the facts is Creationism and many people will reject that because it requires belief in some kind of "Supreme Being".
I think everyone is entitled to their personal beliefs, my biggest annoyance with the whole Evolution vs. Creation argument is that there is no definitive way to prove it - at least not definitive enough for me. As you said, Einstein's Theory of General Relativity can be applied to create an atomic bomb, but Evolutionary Theory cannot be applied to show macro-evolution.
Personally my feeling is it's a really stupid thing to argue about. Present the facts, let people draw their conclusions, but don't present this idea of life coming out of some primordial ooze as fact if you can't prove it.
OK, so I was wrong. Thanks for the link though - I think this is a good solution to the problem (from the article):
Only in post-revolution France could an invention be given "free to all the world" and its inventor rewarded with a lifelong pension from the government.
I vote we get rid of patents and do this.
You know this is a topic that comes up here, and is argued about, all the time.
What about case study? We have had patents for what, 200 years? Surely examples can be produced for both the positive and negative aspects of patents. Let's here them.
I'll start out. This is a story I've heard, and I don't have a significant amount of time to research it. From what I understand, George Eastman of Eastman Kodak used the patent system to lock up the photography industry for many, many years. He would wait until one patent was nearly up, modify his product minimally and acquire a new patent. No other company was able to use his technology, so they could never keep up and Kodak dominated Photography for nearly 100 years.
...the only problem would be not going to jail for the virus you patented!
That's a good point, so what if we do it with spyware instead. Write some very annoying spyware, which is perfectly legal, and copyright the whole thing. Then take the anti-spyware vendors (who are often the same people as the anti-virus vendors) to court for violating the copyright under the DMCA.
My previous post wasn't intended as a troll, I was (and am) completely serious. One of the great things about this country is the way our judicial system works in respect to laws. If a stupid law is made, the court system will generally uphold every application of it, at least until the Supreme Court decides it's bogus and overturns it.
Everyone on slashdot cries and moans about the DMCA and the patent system. If some of us would figure out ways to exploit these lame laws to hurt big business I'm sure lobbyists in Washington would be quick to get the law re-written. Besides, if a person could Symantec or McAfee for copyright violation and win, I bet you could get a tidy little sum.
Or better yet, someone should copyright their virus and use the DMCA to sue all the anti-virus companies out of existance when they reverse engineer their copyrighted program.
That's something I'd like to see. Symantec execs being escorted to jail for "Virus Piracy"
Google is a search engine. Yahoo has become much more of a portal site with additional services.
Their webmail is good, their personals are good, their financial tracking is good, their news stories are interesting. I use it often just to check the market, read comics, catch up on the latest Paris Hilton scandal, etc... Of course, if I actually want to find anything or do anything useful I use Google.
Good Point.
If everyone donates a buck or two to me I'll send them a nice card and maybe a fruit basket.
- Alexei Vladishev
- Francesco
- Gerbier Eric
- Jerome Couderc
and many others. The big projects help us get things done, but the small projects make the big projects barable.Seriously, I imagine that's exactly what will happen. When they are worthless enough IBM will buy them and this will all go away. I imagine they will just wait until the price bottoms out.
They can pay your taxes. That's why I give my SSN out to everyone I possibly can.
Umm... the article said no sig required for charges less than $25. So just walk by somebody with a reader asking for a $20 charge. A couple hundred people in a mall? That would add up pretty quickly.
Personally I think this is a stupid idea anyway. I don't have any issues scanning my card, or siging for purchases less than $25. As a consumer, why would I want this technology at all?
is my time to fill out and read that document worth a few bucks?
I know I'll fill it out and get my cut - just in case it ever happened to me. Heck, it's fee money.
I think that's a gross exaggeration of the problem, however it could cost eBay a lot in man-hours auditting the results of every auction since the beginning to determine who is entitled to a refund.
I hope if the court does find for the plaintiff they don't make eBay go to those lengths. I agree the practice is bunk, but would hate to see eBay thrown into bankruptcy over something like this. Make them stop, slap their hand, and move on.
Personally I'm not sure I could live in a world without eBay.
The only weakness is Adama...
I mostly agree with your comments - but have to disagree with your analysis of Edward James Olmos. I think the character's tension with the president, closing of the tribunals, invasion of Colonial 1, etc.. has been fantastic. I think the idea fits well with the character. He was slated to retire - this was his last command. I see him as someone that was had a fantastic career, but has become obsolete. Between losing his son, new technology reducing his usefulness (this is addressed in early episodes) and the decomissioning of his ship he has become a little unstable and strange. Deep down he's a great man and everyone respects him because of his history, but he's not really the best person to be leading the remnant of humanity on their quest for a new home. I think Olmos lends an incredible humanity to the character.
You mean the cool one that lets him bang all the other chicks??
France can just index its own books and materials...
But they will probably do it in French.
Who's going to read them??
Interesting. Sounds like they are trying to outlaw one kind of technology and specifically pu that languqage into the law. They can't just say you can't transfer music to another medium for play in a different player - that would violate the ability to actually copy to another CD. OTOH, what If I copy the CD to another CD and then play the copy in a CD player that will play music CDs and CDs with mp3s on them. Is that illegal? If it's not, what If I convert the music to MP3s, write them to a CD and play them in the same player.
Sounds like some lawyers will have a good time at the government's expense over this one.
Actually elinks is a further expansion on the concep that will handle some frames, tables and some javascript.