It's not dishonest nor dishonorable - it's done all the time.
Think about it - Proview sold the iPad trademark for around $50,000. Why should the value of that trademark be worth more if Apple was buying it? The ability of Apple to pay more has no bearing on the worth of the mark - only in what Proview might ask for.
Think about the flip side - a used car dealer sizing people up based on how they dress. If you wear jeans and a T-Shirt you get one price, if you wear a suit and dress shoes you get another price. Saying this is dishonest is like saying it's dishonest to visit a used car dealership wearing junky clothes.
So if I propose a communication system that involves shouting loudly through a megaphone across the street and the environment agency shuts it down, not only could I sue them but all the house-builders who did not provide adequate sound insulation?
Yes. Keeping with the analogy, shouting over a megaphone would be a valid communication system in many other neighborhoods, just not that particular one. You'd think that if house builders knew that it would be possible, or probable, that this kind of communication system would eventually be in use, they'd build their houses accordingly. But this particular subdivision builder cheaped out on sound insulation.
But you don't have to use Google. Government has the power to aggregate *everything* - tax records, banking records, property records, health records, insurance records, travel records, along with whatever they can glean from Google. Living without Google is relatively easy. Try functioning in modern society without a bank account, paying taxes, or using health services.
What do you think this website is? It's for geeks. Geeks like gadgets, and talking about gadgets. If you don't like these posts, filter them out, or go somewhere else.
Suppose you want to delete everything from a directory that was created in the past 24 hours. How would you do that with Explorer?
View by detail, sort by date, ctrl-down until the date changes. Or use the search-folder tool using date criteria.
Or if you want to find all the TIFF files under a tree, and move them to a single directory?
Organize-group by file type.
Or even just batch renaming? How do you do that with Explorer?
Yeah, you need a third party utility for that - or use the command line.
The CLI is superior in some situations, but I find myself mostly using the UI for file management, mostly because I regularly have to move around arbitrary files in large file collections during development/debug work. For batch operations the CLI (or scripts) are usually superior.
That, or I have to find one of my folders in that hideous tree dialog on the left.
If your directories are laid out properly this isn't a big deal anymore.
This is just as true for digital, only you won't hear them, you'll just get clutter.
Either a digital cable transfers information perfectly or it doesn't. Unless your SPDIF or HDMI drivers are utter garbage, EFI shouldn't be a problem.
The connectors only matter insofar as to whether you have a sustained connection or an intermittent one.
Not quite. The connectors should match the impedance of the cable or they'll reflect signal. Again, won't matter so much for digital (it'll either work or it won't) but can make a difference for analog (and even more for video if you're still doing analog video) RCA connectors matter even more as the impedance of audio cables can vary widely but the connectors are always around 75 ohms. It would make more sense to use BNC connectors for audio, but they are slightly more expensive and, I guess, so much more work to use that nobody implements them.
That being said, you shouldn't have to spend more than $10 to get a well-built analog audio cable. It doesn't cost that much to make them yourself, either.
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 1
The article is more about taxing, or the lack of such in, capital gains, and it's worth noting that even unsold the shares had utility value in that they could be used as collateral.
Then you can tax the gains when they are used as collateral during the process of loan payments. Taxing something because it may possibly be used as collateral doesn't make sense.
I think if you talk about taxes in terms of "punishing" people then you're already on the wrong track.
I'm using the term punishment as the net result of taxes, not necessarily the driving force behind the tax. Making an activity more expensive discourages people from engaging in it. Taxes influence behavior. The government uses taxes as a behavior modification tool all the time - higher taxes on cigarettes, liquor, salty foods, foods in high fat, you name it.
A key component of the idea of Capitalism is the right to private property, and independent control over it. If the parents wish to give their money and property to their children, it's their property and they have the right to do so. If they wish to give the property away to charity, or whatever other purpose they wish, that is also their right.
Forcing people to surrender their property at the time of their death deprives them of their property rights.
In other words, who are you to tell someone what they can and can't do with their money after they die?
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 1
I think that taxing savings might encourage people to spend money which is otherwise sitting there doing nothing and not helping the economy.
You need to read up on how banks work. Banks take your savings and loan it to other people to buys houses and cars and factories, etc... They charge those people 4% and give you 2%, thereby making a profit. Of course, to "stimulate" the economy the interest rates are in the crapper, making the return on savings accounts almost not worth it. It also encourages banks to find more creative ways of making money - hence the recent mortgage securities fiasco.
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
It's like giving someone a car as compensation, the car is taxed at the value of the car when given, and if it goes up or down later that's a separate issue.
Seriously? A car has immediate inherent and utility value - you can drive it around. An option has NO value at it's time of issue - it's the potential ability, after a period of time, to buy stock at a particular price. At issuance it's nearly worthless. Taxing it at full value at the time of issuance is like selling someone a package of carrot seeds, and taxing them the value of a bushel of carrots.
There's nothing particularly wrong with taxing wealth rather than income theoretically.
Heck yes there is. It punishes people for saving and investing. It's only marginally less lousy than punishing people for making money in the first place. The correct avenue is to tax consumption.
Fukushima was designed to withstand earthquakes of greater magnitude than had been recorded in that area, and tsunamis larger than had been recorded in that area. In what way do you believe they were under-engineered (using the best available data at the time of their construction, of course.)
Blame FDR. The supreme court was striking down his New Deal regulations and reforms left and right as they didn't jive with the whole "regulating interstate commerce" thing. So he packed the court with statists who rubber-stamped nearly every program and rule with tortured interpretations of the commerce clause.
The side-effect is that the federal government can now regulate nearly everything you do. Unintended consequences and all.
You have it all backwards. In a democracy, you elect people, then they tell you what to do. See, because you voted for them, they can do whatever they want to you. Yay!
+1. There were cars in the 90's that got 40-50MPG using the new EPA formulae. They would be considered death traps these days. Gotta load in 400lbs of airbags, crumple zones and double-folded steel pillars to keep people safe.
Using today's engine and transmission technology, the same cars would probably be pushing 80MPG, without all the extra safety equipment weighing them down.
I've seen exactly one on the road (with manufacturer plates) and I work near a major automotive testing facility where they test just about everything. I've seen more Lancias than Fiskars, and they don't even sell Lancias in the US.
I saw it at night, and at first I thought it was some weird Peugeot, as it was hideous-looking from the back (the week before I had seen a new Peugeot wagon on a flatbed - I thought it was a Golf with some awful body kit bolted-on)
The FAA has it's headquarters in DC (makes sense) major offices in Seattle (Boeing/Aerospace) and Chicago (Boeing and major flight hub) - all make sense. The FAA's big data center is in... Oklahoma City.
The idea of removing impurities using light is cool if it increases the efficiency of the completed pannel.
>
Probably not. Getting very pure silicon is relatively easy. Even if it did, solar panel efficiency is so abysmal a few percentage points more isn't going to help.
What they need to focus on is producing inverters more efficiently. Those things are *expensive*, and required if you want to rig solar panels into your existing household AC lines (and sell energy back to the grid.)
Not congress. Congress can pass laws telling them to regulate stuff, but it's up to the secretary (and the president) to manage the day-to-day operations.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not dishonest nor dishonorable - it's done all the time.
Think about it - Proview sold the iPad trademark for around $50,000. Why should the value of that trademark be worth more if Apple was buying it? The ability of Apple to pay more has no bearing on the worth of the mark - only in what Proview might ask for.
Think about the flip side - a used car dealer sizing people up based on how they dress. If you wear jeans and a T-Shirt you get one price, if you wear a suit and dress shoes you get another price. Saying this is dishonest is like saying it's dishonest to visit a used car dealership wearing junky clothes.
So if I propose a communication system that involves shouting loudly through a megaphone across the street and the environment agency shuts it down, not only could I sue them but all the house-builders who did not provide adequate sound insulation?
Yes. Keeping with the analogy, shouting over a megaphone would be a valid communication system in many other neighborhoods, just not that particular one. You'd think that if house builders knew that it would be possible, or probable, that this kind of communication system would eventually be in use, they'd build their houses accordingly. But this particular subdivision builder cheaped out on sound insulation.
But you don't have to use Google. Government has the power to aggregate *everything* - tax records, banking records, property records, health records, insurance records, travel records, along with whatever they can glean from Google. Living without Google is relatively easy. Try functioning in modern society without a bank account, paying taxes, or using health services.
http://reason.com/archives/2011/03/25/the-truth-about-nuclear-power/singlepage
OK, then why are you posting about the moral problems of buying iOS devices on an article about a desktop operating system?
iCloud isn't free but 5GB is free? What?
What do you think this website is? It's for geeks. Geeks like gadgets, and talking about gadgets. If you don't like these posts, filter them out, or go somewhere else.
They didn't also require AC receptacle plug covers installed so electricity doesn't leak out of the wall sockets and give everyone cancer.
Suppose you want to delete everything from a directory that was created in the past 24 hours. How would you do that with Explorer?
View by detail, sort by date, ctrl-down until the date changes. Or use the search-folder tool using date criteria.
Or if you want to find all the TIFF files under a tree, and move them to a single directory?
Organize-group by file type.
Or even just batch renaming? How do you do that with Explorer?
Yeah, you need a third party utility for that - or use the command line.
The CLI is superior in some situations, but I find myself mostly using the UI for file management, mostly because I regularly have to move around arbitrary files in large file collections during development/debug work. For batch operations the CLI (or scripts) are usually superior.
That, or I have to find one of my folders in that hideous tree dialog on the left.
If your directories are laid out properly this isn't a big deal anymore.
This is just as true for digital, only you won't hear them, you'll just get clutter.
Either a digital cable transfers information perfectly or it doesn't. Unless your SPDIF or HDMI drivers are utter garbage, EFI shouldn't be a problem.
The connectors only matter insofar as to whether you have a sustained connection or an intermittent one.
Not quite. The connectors should match the impedance of the cable or they'll reflect signal. Again, won't matter so much for digital (it'll either work or it won't) but can make a difference for analog (and even more for video if you're still doing analog video) RCA connectors matter even more as the impedance of audio cables can vary widely but the connectors are always around 75 ohms. It would make more sense to use BNC connectors for audio, but they are slightly more expensive and, I guess, so much more work to use that nobody implements them.
That being said, you shouldn't have to spend more than $10 to get a well-built analog audio cable. It doesn't cost that much to make them yourself, either.
The article is more about taxing, or the lack of such in, capital gains, and it's worth noting that even unsold the shares had utility value in that they could be used as collateral.
Then you can tax the gains when they are used as collateral during the process of loan payments. Taxing something because it may possibly be used as collateral doesn't make sense.
I think if you talk about taxes in terms of "punishing" people then you're already on the wrong track.
I'm using the term punishment as the net result of taxes, not necessarily the driving force behind the tax. Making an activity more expensive discourages people from engaging in it. Taxes influence behavior. The government uses taxes as a behavior modification tool all the time - higher taxes on cigarettes, liquor, salty foods, foods in high fat, you name it.
A key component of the idea of Capitalism is the right to private property, and independent control over it. If the parents wish to give their money and property to their children, it's their property and they have the right to do so. If they wish to give the property away to charity, or whatever other purpose they wish, that is also their right.
Forcing people to surrender their property at the time of their death deprives them of their property rights.
In other words, who are you to tell someone what they can and can't do with their money after they die?
I think that taxing savings might encourage people to spend money which is otherwise sitting there doing nothing and not helping the economy.
You need to read up on how banks work. Banks take your savings and loan it to other people to buys houses and cars and factories, etc... They charge those people 4% and give you 2%, thereby making a profit. Of course, to "stimulate" the economy the interest rates are in the crapper, making the return on savings accounts almost not worth it. It also encourages banks to find more creative ways of making money - hence the recent mortgage securities fiasco.
It's like giving someone a car as compensation, the car is taxed at the value of the car when given, and if it goes up or down later that's a separate issue.
Seriously? A car has immediate inherent and utility value - you can drive it around. An option has NO value at it's time of issue - it's the potential ability, after a period of time, to buy stock at a particular price. At issuance it's nearly worthless. Taxing it at full value at the time of issuance is like selling someone a package of carrot seeds, and taxing them the value of a bushel of carrots.
There's nothing particularly wrong with taxing wealth rather than income theoretically.
Heck yes there is. It punishes people for saving and investing. It's only marginally less lousy than punishing people for making money in the first place. The correct avenue is to tax consumption.
Fukushima was designed to withstand earthquakes of greater magnitude than had been recorded in that area, and tsunamis larger than had been recorded in that area. In what way do you believe they were under-engineered (using the best available data at the time of their construction, of course.)
Blame FDR. The supreme court was striking down his New Deal regulations and reforms left and right as they didn't jive with the whole "regulating interstate commerce" thing. So he packed the court with statists who rubber-stamped nearly every program and rule with tortured interpretations of the commerce clause.
The side-effect is that the federal government can now regulate nearly everything you do. Unintended consequences and all.
You have it all backwards. In a democracy, you elect people, then they tell you what to do. See, because you voted for them, they can do whatever they want to you. Yay!
+1. There were cars in the 90's that got 40-50MPG using the new EPA formulae. They would be considered death traps these days. Gotta load in 400lbs of airbags, crumple zones and double-folded steel pillars to keep people safe.
Using today's engine and transmission technology, the same cars would probably be pushing 80MPG, without all the extra safety equipment weighing them down.
I've seen exactly one on the road (with manufacturer plates) and I work near a major automotive testing facility where they test just about everything. I've seen more Lancias than Fiskars, and they don't even sell Lancias in the US.
I saw it at night, and at first I thought it was some weird Peugeot, as it was hideous-looking from the back (the week before I had seen a new Peugeot wagon on a flatbed - I thought it was a Golf with some awful body kit bolted-on)
http://www.apple.com/opensource/
Here's the source code to all the open source software in MacOSX, along with any patches they did to the source.
http://opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-107/
Here the sources for a bunch of the core system components, including the kernel.
Where's the source code for the Windows 7 kernel again?
The FAA has it's headquarters in DC (makes sense) major offices in Seattle (Boeing/Aerospace) and Chicago (Boeing and major flight hub) - all make sense. The FAA's big data center is in... Oklahoma City.
The idea of removing impurities using light is cool if it increases the efficiency of the completed pannel.
>
Probably not. Getting very pure silicon is relatively easy. Even if it did, solar panel efficiency is so abysmal a few percentage points more isn't going to help.
What they need to focus on is producing inverters more efficiently. Those things are *expensive*, and required if you want to rig solar panels into your existing household AC lines (and sell energy back to the grid.)
FDA Health & Human Services Cabinet President
Not congress. Congress can pass laws telling them to regulate stuff, but it's up to the secretary (and the president) to manage the day-to-day operations.
Hint: It's "Windows Phone".
You mean it's not "Windows Phone 7 Series"? Damn I've been calling it the wrong thing...
How ironic that you only mention two of the buildings, considering the WTC report fails to mention (much less attempt to explain!) Building 7 as well!
Why do you say that? The NIST report certainly does.
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm