Plenty of us don't expect to get our religious guidance from politicians, and find it refreshing to see a candidate that doesn't take his faith very seriously.
... managing to anger both sides when speaking about abortion - twice.
... but pleased the majority of Americans that don't agree with either extreme on the abortion issue. A majority of Americans are basically pro-choice, but a majority also are willing to accept some restrictions on late term abortions.
Disclaimer: I don't currently plan to vote for Trump, but I prefer a pandering flip-flopper over a consistent extremist like Ted Cruz who actually believes what he says.
You think you're being funny. All you're really being is racist.
The funny thing is that he isn't even a competent racist. He has his stereotypes all mixed up: Indians win spelling bees (10 of the last 14), Chinese win math competitions. Since Edward is Chinese, it was silly to think this was a spelling bee.
It is 999,999,999/32. The 13 is his age. The problem is not so hard. 1,000,000,000 is 10^9 = 2^9*5^9, and 32=2^5, so obviously 1,000,000,000 is evenly divisible by 32, so one less is going to have a remainder of 31. Duh.
I don't know much about the Math Bee, but I coach kids for the Math Olympiad, and we do a lot of drills to break numbers down into prime factors, and rapidly compute powers of two. Solving a problem like this in seven seconds is impressive, but not uncommon for a kid that has been trained.
And this explains Apple declining more than PCs how?
Apple has not updated most of their laptop or desktop systems for more than a year. They were waiting for Skylake. They just updated the base Macbook in April, but too late for 1st Quarter sales. The others will likely be announced at WWDC in June. Expect a BIG jump in sales. My wife and daughter both plan to buy new MacBook Pros as soon as they are available. Source: MacRumors Buyer's Guide.
They may not have a front mounted ICE but they do have batteries and electric motors that aren't mass free.
The batteries and motors are not in the crumple zone. The batteries are in the chassis, so when you are driving, they are under you. In an accident, the front end of the car can crumple further, and absorb more energy, than an ICE car.
Americans generally don't travel much and seldom bother to learn a foreign language.
Many tech companies in Sweden use English as their working language. In Britain, English is even more common, although they don't speak it as well as the Swedes.
Should Americans be paid the same as the people that you outsource to?
Americans should be paid what they are worth. Nothing more, nothing less. Anyone who has worked with both Americans and Indians can tell you that Americans are far more productive. They are worth more. They are also paid more, by a factor of about 15. For many jobs, Americans are 15 times more productive. But where they are not, they have no birthright to the job.
And the brakes? Some number of tens of milligrams of brake dust?
Not even that. Electric cars use regenerative braking. So if an electric car going 100 kph needs to stop, the engine runs backwards to slow it down to about 10 kph, and the brakes just handle the last 10% of the speed reduction, but since energy is proportional to the velocity squared the brakes are only dissipating the last 1% of the energy.
Electric cars produce far less brake pad dust than gasoline cars, and the brake pads often are good for the life of the car. The fact that the authors include brake pad "emissions" indicates that they know nothing about how electric cars work, collected no actual data, and just made up their results to generate clicks.
So you have some actual evidence that these islands sinking is due to subduction, right? As well as evidence that there is no sea level rise, right?
There is plenty of evidence that sea levels are rising... by about 2.5mm per year, or about an inch per decade. There is no way that is enough to "sink an island". This article is the kind of stupid over-the-top alarmism that drives more people into the denialist camp.
Climate change is a serious problem that needs to be addressed, but it is not an imminent crisis. We don't need lies and hyperbolic exaggerations to scare people into taking action. That is counter-productive, and just leads to crisis-fatigue and loss of credibility. Nothing did more damage to the credibility of climate scientists than the wild exaggerations in the 2007 IPCC report, and this is just more of the same garbage.
Within 5 miles of my house, gas prices vary by 40 cents per gallon (Chevron is the highest, Rotten Robbie is the lowest). So there is no way that the retail margin is only 1 cent.
So are the cost of living. I doubt bottom line is a big difference.
London is more expensive than SF or NYC, yet median income is lower. Almost anywhere in the American Midwest or South has cheaper housing than Europe if you look at prices per sq meter.
Or look at it from a different angle: How many American go to Europe to start a tech career? Very few. How many Europeans come to America? I live in San Jose, CA and not a single other person on my cul-de-sac was born in America. At work, my group includes three Brits, two Frenchies, a Swede, and a Kraut. They wouldn't be coming here if the opportunities were not better.
True, but it is also becoming more and more popular for companies in the US to tell their employees that the company simply cannot afford to give them a cost-of-living raise, even though the company is raking in record profits.
Companies give raises, or not, based on what they think they need to pay to retain employees, and attract new employees. They don't give raises "because they can afford it". Employees chose to stay, or not, based on what they think they are worth, and what they can earn elsewhere.
Whether there is "hidden money" or not, is irrelevant. Plenty of highly profitable companies layoff workers that they consider unproductive, as they should. No "affordability" justification is needed.
The practices are not "illegal", but they are socially unacceptable
Don't be so quick to judge. Many people on the list are from Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, and other Latin American countries where extortion and kidnapping for ransom are common. Some of them are hiding their wealth to protect their families.
If they are not breaking any laws, then why do you care where they park their money? Why is it any of your concern?
In theory, evidence collected through illegal means cannot be submitted in court.
The leak violated Panamanian law. It is not clear if any American laws were broken.
"fruit of the poisoned tree" and all that.
"Fruit of the poisoned tree" usually only applies if the government broke the law to obtain the evidence. It does not necessarily apply if the law breaking was done by a third party.
But very few of the people on the list were Americans. We have plenty of perfectly legal domestic tax shelters.
The Obama administration sued Boeing for moving jobs from Seattle to South Carolina. So yes, some people believe that moving jobs from higher costs areas to lower cost areas, even within America, is wrong.
Trump is popular because people think protectionism will make things better?
Yes, polling has shown that protectionism is favored by the majority in both parties. Most people are ignorant of economics in general, and the ugly history of protectionism in particular. As we throw up barriers, other countries will retaliate, and everyone will be dragged down. Every complex problem has a solution that is simple, obvious and wrong. Most voters understand that protectionism is simple and obvious. Fewer understand why it is wrong.
What if we exclude foreign payroll and expenses from being deductible?
Then the trickle of companies doing inversions to get out of America will turn into a flood.
If companies are not investing in America or hiring American workers, you are not going to change their behavior by being even more hostile.
Another reason this protectionist nonsense is a bad idea: Other countries will immediately retaliate, and make any payroll expenses in America non-deductible. About six million Americans work for foreign owned companies, and most of these jobs pay above average salaries.
Prediction: right when they get their outsourced IT working smoothly, those newspapers will be wiped out by Internet competition
They will not avoid this problem by continuing to use American workers. It is not like the volunteers and gig-workers only target companies that "deserve it". If anything, cost cutting will help them hang on longer.
Ditto with shares in the company. The first batch of investors are gong-ho on the business proposition, so they readily pay $50 million for 5%. But if you were to go public the next 5% batch of shares would go for say $45 million and the next one after that for $40 million. The last batch would sell for as little as $10 million for a total valuation of around $500 million.
This is nonsense. Later stage valuations are usually higher than early rounds, because the company is bigger, with a longer track record, and there is less risk. Otherwise, why would anyone ever be an early investor? "Down rounds" happen, but they are not common.
I'm assuming regular taxi drivers also need to be fingerprinted
Taxi drivers do not currently need to be fingerprinted, but under the new regulation they will need to submit fingerprints by Feb 2017. The fact that nobody cared about fingerprinting drivers until Uber and Lyft came along, indicates that fingerprinting is not designed to address an actual safety problem.
you could just go into business as a fingerprinting version of them and compete.
No you couldn't. The fingerprinting was designed to harass them into leaving or at least paying extortion. It worked, but if it hadn't, the city would have just piled on more petty regulations. There is no way that this would have been the end of it.
To get a return of 40% on that billion invested, they'll need 400 million dollars. That means the company will have to make a total of 8 billion dollars.
No. Your math is all wrong. You are off by a factor of 20.
And the problem is these shit companies make no money.
It is fun to sit in your mom's basement and explain why you are so much smarter than those stoopid billionaire VCs, but Slashdot has a pretty poor track record. The overwhelming consensus here was that Google's IPO was way overpriced, and that Facebook had no viable business mode and would soon be out of business.
Slashdot Mirror
It's fun to see Trump try to talk on religion.
Plenty of us don't expect to get our religious guidance from politicians, and find it refreshing to see a candidate that doesn't take his faith very seriously.
... managing to anger both sides when speaking about abortion - twice.
... but pleased the majority of Americans that don't agree with either extreme on the abortion issue. A majority of Americans are basically pro-choice, but a majority also are willing to accept some restrictions on late term abortions.
Disclaimer: I don't currently plan to vote for Trump, but I prefer a pandering flip-flopper over a consistent extremist like Ted Cruz who actually believes what he says.
You think you're being funny.
All you're really being is racist.
The funny thing is that he isn't even a competent racist. He has his stereotypes all mixed up: Indians win spelling bees (10 of the last 14), Chinese win math competitions. Since Edward is Chinese, it was silly to think this was a spelling bee.
When you get to the 999,999,999/13 part ...
It is 999,999,999/32. The 13 is his age. The problem is not so hard. 1,000,000,000 is 10^9 = 2^9*5^9, and 32=2^5, so obviously 1,000,000,000 is evenly divisible by 32, so one less is going to have a remainder of 31. Duh.
I don't know much about the Math Bee, but I coach kids for the Math Olympiad, and we do a lot of drills to break numbers down into prime factors, and rapidly compute powers of two. Solving a problem like this in seven seconds is impressive, but not uncommon for a kid that has been trained.
And this explains Apple declining more than PCs how?
Apple has not updated most of their laptop or desktop systems for more than a year. They were waiting for Skylake. They just updated the base Macbook in April, but too late for 1st Quarter sales. The others will likely be announced at WWDC in June. Expect a BIG jump in sales. My wife and daughter both plan to buy new MacBook Pros as soon as they are available. Source: MacRumors Buyer's Guide.
They may not have a front mounted ICE but they do have batteries and electric motors that aren't mass free.
The batteries and motors are not in the crumple zone. The batteries are in the chassis, so when you are driving, they are under you. In an accident, the front end of the car can crumple further, and absorb more energy, than an ICE car.
Americans generally don't travel much and seldom bother to learn a foreign language.
Many tech companies in Sweden use English as their working language. In Britain, English is even more common, although they don't speak it as well as the Swedes.
Should Americans be paid the same as the people that you outsource to?
Americans should be paid what they are worth. Nothing more, nothing less. Anyone who has worked with both Americans and Indians can tell you that Americans are far more productive. They are worth more. They are also paid more, by a factor of about 15. For many jobs, Americans are 15 times more productive. But where they are not, they have no birthright to the job.
And the brakes? Some number of tens of milligrams of brake dust?
Not even that. Electric cars use regenerative braking. So if an electric car going 100 kph needs to stop, the engine runs backwards to slow it down to about 10 kph, and the brakes just handle the last 10% of the speed reduction, but since energy is proportional to the velocity squared the brakes are only dissipating the last 1% of the energy.
Electric cars produce far less brake pad dust than gasoline cars, and the brake pads often are good for the life of the car. The fact that the authors include brake pad "emissions" indicates that they know nothing about how electric cars work, collected no actual data, and just made up their results to generate clicks.
So you have some actual evidence that these islands sinking is due to subduction, right? As well as evidence that there is no sea level rise, right?
There is plenty of evidence that sea levels are rising ... by about 2.5mm per year, or about an inch per decade. There is no way that is enough to "sink an island". This article is the kind of stupid over-the-top alarmism that drives more people into the denialist camp.
Climate change is a serious problem that needs to be addressed, but it is not an imminent crisis. We don't need lies and hyperbolic exaggerations to scare people into taking action. That is counter-productive, and just leads to crisis-fatigue and loss of credibility. Nothing did more damage to the credibility of climate scientists than the wild exaggerations in the 2007 IPCC report, and this is just more of the same garbage.
Gasoline Retailer $.01 cents per gallon
Within 5 miles of my house, gas prices vary by 40 cents per gallon (Chevron is the highest, Rotten Robbie is the lowest). So there is no way that the retail margin is only 1 cent.
So are the cost of living. I doubt bottom line is a big difference.
London is more expensive than SF or NYC, yet median income is lower. Almost anywhere in the American Midwest or South has cheaper housing than Europe if you look at prices per sq meter.
Or look at it from a different angle: How many American go to Europe to start a tech career? Very few. How many Europeans come to America? I live in San Jose, CA and not a single other person on my cul-de-sac was born in America. At work, my group includes three Brits, two Frenchies, a Swede, and a Kraut. They wouldn't be coming here if the opportunities were not better.
True, but it is also becoming more and more popular for companies in the US to tell their employees that the company simply cannot afford to give them a cost-of-living raise, even though the company is raking in record profits.
Companies give raises, or not, based on what they think they need to pay to retain employees, and attract new employees. They don't give raises "because they can afford it". Employees chose to stay, or not, based on what they think they are worth, and what they can earn elsewhere.
Whether there is "hidden money" or not, is irrelevant. Plenty of highly profitable companies layoff workers that they consider unproductive, as they should. No "affordability" justification is needed.
The practices are not "illegal", but they are socially unacceptable
Don't be so quick to judge. Many people on the list are from Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, and other Latin American countries where extortion and kidnapping for ransom are common. Some of them are hiding their wealth to protect their families.
If they are not breaking any laws, then why do you care where they park their money? Why is it any of your concern?
In theory, evidence collected through illegal means cannot be submitted in court.
The leak violated Panamanian law. It is not clear if any American laws were broken.
"fruit of the poisoned tree" and all that.
"Fruit of the poisoned tree" usually only applies if the government broke the law to obtain the evidence. It does not necessarily apply if the law breaking was done by a third party.
But very few of the people on the list were Americans. We have plenty of perfectly legal domestic tax shelters.
It's nice to know when, say, a CEO lets his/her employees go because there's not enough money (and yet there's many millions in offshore accounts).
Companies employ people when the employees add value and contribute to profit. They don't employ people because they can afford the spend the money.
The Obama administration sued Boeing for moving jobs from Seattle to South Carolina. So yes, some people believe that moving jobs from higher costs areas to lower cost areas, even within America, is wrong.
Trump is popular because people think protectionism will make things better?
Yes, polling has shown that protectionism is favored by the majority in both parties. Most people are ignorant of economics in general, and the ugly history of protectionism in particular. As we throw up barriers, other countries will retaliate, and everyone will be dragged down. Every complex problem has a solution that is simple, obvious and wrong. Most voters understand that protectionism is simple and obvious. Fewer understand why it is wrong.
What if we exclude foreign payroll and expenses from being deductible?
Then the trickle of companies doing inversions to get out of America will turn into a flood.
If companies are not investing in America or hiring American workers, you are not going to change their behavior by being even more hostile.
Another reason this protectionist nonsense is a bad idea: Other countries will immediately retaliate, and make any payroll expenses in America non-deductible. About six million Americans work for foreign owned companies, and most of these jobs pay above average salaries.
Prediction: right when they get their outsourced IT working smoothly, those newspapers will be wiped out by Internet competition
They will not avoid this problem by continuing to use American workers. It is not like the volunteers and gig-workers only target companies that "deserve it". If anything, cost cutting will help them hang on longer.
And there are plenty of European countries with strong IT job markets.
IT salaries in America are higher than in most European countries, and tech unemployment, at about 3%, is lower.
They also protect their working class.
The best route to prosperity for working people is a thriving economy. You don't get that with rigid labor markets.
How much does MS get paid for every Android phone sold?
Depending on the features included, Microsoft makes from $5 to $15 per Android phone. They get about $2B per year from Android licensing fees.
Ditto with shares in the company. The first batch of investors are gong-ho on the business proposition, so they readily pay $50 million for 5%. But if you were to go public the next 5% batch of shares would go for say $45 million and the next one after that for $40 million. The last batch would sell for as little as $10 million for a total valuation of around $500 million.
This is nonsense. Later stage valuations are usually higher than early rounds, because the company is bigger, with a longer track record, and there is less risk. Otherwise, why would anyone ever be an early investor? "Down rounds" happen, but they are not common.
I'm assuming regular taxi drivers also need to be fingerprinted
Taxi drivers do not currently need to be fingerprinted, but under the new regulation they will need to submit fingerprints by Feb 2017. The fact that nobody cared about fingerprinting drivers until Uber and Lyft came along, indicates that fingerprinting is not designed to address an actual safety problem.
you could just go into business as a fingerprinting version of them and compete.
No you couldn't. The fingerprinting was designed to harass them into leaving or at least paying extortion. It worked, but if it hadn't, the city would have just piled on more petty regulations. There is no way that this would have been the end of it.
To get a return of 40% on that billion invested, they'll need 400 million dollars. That means the company will have to make a total of 8 billion dollars.
No. Your math is all wrong. You are off by a factor of 20.
And the problem is these shit companies make no money.
It is fun to sit in your mom's basement and explain why you are so much smarter than those stoopid billionaire VCs, but Slashdot has a pretty poor track record. The overwhelming consensus here was that Google's IPO was way overpriced, and that Facebook had no viable business mode and would soon be out of business.