In your little theory, you are missing the fact that Katherine Harris served as a co-chair of Bush's campaign in Florida. GOP could expect nothing but full co-operation from her.
So then we're on the same page: either your generic is not the same as Tylenol in its ingredients (the non-active ones can make a difference too), or it's a placebo for you.
That's because those "generics", as you call them, don't consist of the same thing. Take Tylenol Soar Throat for example: it actively uses acetaminophen, dextromethorphan HBr and doxylamine succinate (against fever, cough, and antialergen, respectively). Your "generic" probably only includes acetaminophen (for pain/fever relief). Make sure you check a complete list of ingredients before blaming a "generic" for not having the same effect as the brand name.
PS: Look at how many variants of Tylenol there are, each one with different additives for different purpose.
Generic acetaminophen does nothing for me but Tylenol-branded stuff almost always works. It's not this way for me with any other drug so I guess it must have to do with the buffers that Tylenol puts in their pills.
For those who didn't get it, notice that they freewillingly used of "anarchic" to put a bad light on file swapping to make it seem like it's something obsolete already.
And not just that, they also show their bias and clearly take sides, which ends up revealing their motives, when they say:
"The slow shift in MP3's role is part of an ongoing change in the digital-music industry, with the focus moving slowly away from the anarchic file-swapping networks and toward money-making stores and services such as Apple's iTunes Music Store."
"I spent a day visiting every - single - machine in the office and applying [the critical security update] myself"
I just laugh at poor clueless admins like yourself. The years that you "spent dealing with people" could have been better used if you picked up an admin book to teach your technician monkey ass some new tricks.
Some people are missing the point and think that this project was invented just to play MIDI drum sounds through a speaker. Although I cannot reach the website because of the slashdotting, I can infer from the original post that this is a real robot playing real drums. This is an admirable feat at the very least.
I was able to reach a mirror and must confirm that you are wrong. This is not a real robot playing real drums. This is just a mapping of the MIDI drum instrument to an output device that is not the soundcard with the sound samples but a physical drum.
Moreover apart from the intensity of the drum stick punch, they can't control anything else.
For those, who wonder that this is the high end of robotic technology, I must disappoint you. This is nothing more but an engineering project to put a bunch of pneumatic valves and map them to a computer. I am not flaming here, don't get me wrong, but to appreciate what they did, one needs to understand what REALLY happened.
Basically what they did, is they mapped physical instruments to what otherwise a sound card would have to generate. A soundcard usually has a set of instrument samples built into it so that it can play MIDI files (MIDI is an established interface to have music-related stuff talk to eatch other and understand music as data).(When a card does it, it's called wavetable synthesis.) People usually load the more advanced ones soundards which have this capability with better-sounding instrument samples and thus get the computer to help them sequence higher-quality music.
So what the project that those guys accomplishes is that now, you can map the "drum instrument" to a physical device instead of an "in-memory sound bank" that would get played through your PC sound system.
No, you forgot that your net gains depend on which leg of the transaction you take - some players favor interest rates staying up. My point was, there is no such player who would be a 'zero-sum' player. The usefulness of presence on the market of people who acquire wealth compared to the presence of people who create wealth makes a big difference. Your so-called 'zero-sum' players on the markets are those who take the bad side of the bet, while on the other side, there was a wealth creator who was only hedging (read: covering his ass). In other words, the name 'zero-sum' players is a misconception, those are 'market losers'.
Moreover, in the present value calculation, you correctly said "real" rate of interest - this is exactly the reality; when the fed funds rate goes up, deflation pressure is created (inflation goes down). The capital gains were diminished to zero by Greenspan's policy exactly BECAUSE they were unsustainable due to real reasons: show me the earnings of those bubble companies?? It was a situation of 'wishful thinking' rather than realistic expectation. Due to certain reasons, I am not going to comment on my opinion of whether policy was right or wrong of Greenspan.
But a fact remains, markets are NOT a zero-sum game. Calling any players on the markets 'zero-sum' players is just plain wrong and misleading.
You know what, I'll stop picking on your terminology and I'll at least send you some interesting reading I have in my bookmarks: here.
What are you blabbering about? Mercantilists used to think that markets are a zero-sum game because wealth is limited and attached to supply of some bullshit commodity, e.g. gold. Almost all economic activity is a non-zero-sum play.
If you ar referring to e.g. equities trading as a "positive-sum" play and e.g. derivatives trading as a "zero-sum" game, you better get your facts straight.
For example with derivatives, there is reallocation of utility among participants - a benefit that makes this a positive-sum game. And an opportunity to forecast at lower transactional cost than traditional securities trading.
Simply stop hiding your vagueness in buzz-words like 'zero-sum players' and 'positive-sum players'. And stop using terminology that is outdated anyway... <hint>Pick up a few books instead.</hint>
And I hope that you are taking my posts as something worth discussing and not as an attempt to attack you. What we are facing is that there are problems at hand and we need to attack those.
So hopefully, you will have understanding for the fact that when my sentences seem like they are targeted personally, they are not. When I use "you", I usually mean any person having the opinion I am commenting on. I enjoy reading your insight so I will be very happy to learn new things from your reactions.
If you met your wife/girlfriend through a match-making service, would you dump her the moment you found someone younger, prettier, or with less expensive tastes on a Russian brides website?
I would dump her the moment I would find someone smarter, more understanding and better suited for me - provided the 'convenience' of my current relationship is not really what I need any more. But if what I need is to see my current wife happy because she is with me, I wouldn't dump her. In any case, it's about what I personally need/want - even if it involves so-called 'selfless' needs.
They will play the loyalty card every time that they want an employee to come in over the weekend, stay late into the evening, or reschedule a vacation so that they can meet the company's needs. Where is the loyalty on the part of the business?
It's called the paycheck. The company's loyalty might not end there necessarily, but it's up to people to not to let themselves get exploited. In capitalism, the businesses would love to pay $0 - that would be the best reduction in labor cost that could get. It's up to the workforce to not let that happen. And to to make that happen is not a matter of 'social responsibility', it is a matter of raising children in a certain way. That's where America is making a mistake - it forgot that new people (bluntly put) come out of people - to shape those new people is what needs to happen. Everything else will follow through as a result of that. America forgot that and it will pay the price by other economies (whether it's the European Union or Indonesia) being more successful because of this value capital. There is no point any more whining about the situation now, it's already here.
That worker's salary was contributing to the economy. He was spending it on goods and services in the U.S., unlike his foreign counterpart.
1. Yes, the worker's salary was spent in the economy - but it's not about the individual's consumption here. The salary was paid out by the wrong party - a party that was forced to spend money because they were forced to employ the person only because he was there for a number of years; money that could have been put into more efficient use (and the opportunity for businesses to spend money more efficiently helps the economy as a whole, don't you think?).
2. Don't bring up the U.S. vs. foreign argument, it's nonsense. Go look up Walmart numbers (has like a $250B GDP - bigger than Sweden or Austria), then walk down to your local Walmart (regardless of where in the world you are, there will be one within a range of max. 300 km), look at the back of the products for the "Made in" labels and please realize that even if you live in the U.S., you do NOT live in a U.S. economy any more.
Overall, you seem to have something against 'foreign' economies, 'foreign' workers, 'foreign' jobs, 'foreign' goods. Where is that xenophobia coming from? Are you fearing you'll be outsmarted, outraced, outdone, made obsolete by the 'foreign', that the 'foreign' is plotting against you? Do you follow what I'm trying to say?
1. Embrace your principles. 2. Realize reality. 3. Decide your future.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn, I should have checked that "post anonymously" box
You 'should have', but you are carma-whoring, so you didn't.
In your little theory, you are missing the fact that Katherine Harris served as a co-chair of Bush's campaign in Florida. GOP could expect nothing but full co-operation from her.
Yep, I would figure so too.
So then we're on the same page: either your generic is not the same as Tylenol in its ingredients (the non-active ones can make a difference too), or it's a placebo for you.
This conversation is going in circles.
That's because those "generics", as you call them, don't consist of the same thing. Take Tylenol Soar Throat for example: it actively uses acetaminophen, dextromethorphan HBr and doxylamine succinate (against fever, cough, and antialergen, respectively). Your "generic" probably only includes acetaminophen (for pain/fever relief). Make sure you check a complete list of ingredients before blaming a "generic" for not having the same effect as the brand name.
PS: Look at how many variants of Tylenol there are, each one with different additives for different purpose.
That secret is called marketing.
Generic acetaminophen does nothing for me but Tylenol-branded stuff almost always works. It's not this way for me with any other drug so I guess it must have to do with the buffers that Tylenol puts in their pills.
Nope, that's called placebo.
It's 7734209, not 7734206.
Fine by me, I was just showing you an example in case you were not aware of it, but you seem to have been.
For those who didn't get it, notice that they freewillingly used of "anarchic" to put a bad light on file swapping to make it seem like it's something obsolete already.
And not just that, they also show their bias and clearly take sides, which ends up revealing their motives, when they say:
"The slow shift in MP3's role is part of an ongoing change in the digital-music industry, with the focus moving slowly away from the anarchic file-swapping networks and toward money-making stores and services such as Apple's iTunes Music Store."
Trillian
How much cheaper can Microsoft expect hardware to get? It's almost costless as it is now.
You're funny, dude...
Parent should be modded "Insightful" and not "Funny", you fucking morons!
"I spent a day visiting every - single - machine in the office and applying [the critical security update] myself"
I just laugh at poor clueless admins like yourself. The years that you "spent dealing with people" could have been better used if you picked up an admin book to teach your technician monkey ass some new tricks.
http://www.lemurbots.org/EmergencyBot.mov
Some people are missing the point and think that this project was invented just to play MIDI drum sounds through a speaker. Although I cannot reach the website because of the slashdotting, I can infer from the original post that this is a real robot playing real drums. This is an admirable feat at the very least.
I was able to reach a mirror and must confirm that you are wrong. This is not a real robot playing real drums. This is just a mapping of the MIDI drum instrument to an output device that is not the soundcard with the sound samples but a physical drum.
Moreover apart from the intensity of the drum stick punch, they can't control anything else.
For those, who wonder that this is the high end of robotic technology, I must disappoint you. This is nothing more but an engineering project to put a bunch of pneumatic valves and map them to a computer. I am not flaming here, don't get me wrong, but to appreciate what they did, one needs to understand what REALLY happened.
Basically what they did, is they mapped physical instruments to what otherwise a sound card would have to generate. A soundcard usually has a set of instrument samples built into it so that it can play MIDI files (MIDI is an established interface to have music-related stuff talk to eatch other and understand music as data).(When a card does it, it's called wavetable synthesis.) People usually load the more advanced ones soundards which have this capability with better-sounding instrument samples and thus get the computer to help them sequence higher-quality music.
So what the project that those guys accomplishes is that now, you can map the "drum instrument" to a physical device instead of an "in-memory sound bank" that would get played through your PC sound system.
FACT: It was being an idiot and I should have read your post twice before commenting.
My bad.
FACT: You can't speak your own language. Proof: you use "Their" where "They're" should have been used.
No, you forgot that your net gains depend on which leg of the transaction you take - some players favor interest rates staying up. My point was, there is no such player who would be a 'zero-sum' player. The usefulness of presence on the market of people who acquire wealth compared to the presence of people who create wealth makes a big difference. Your so-called 'zero-sum' players on the markets are those who take the bad side of the bet, while on the other side, there was a wealth creator who was only hedging (read: covering his ass). In other words, the name 'zero-sum' players is a misconception, those are 'market losers'.
Moreover, in the present value calculation, you correctly said "real" rate of interest - this is exactly the reality; when the fed funds rate goes up, deflation pressure is created (inflation goes down). The capital gains were diminished to zero by Greenspan's policy exactly BECAUSE they were unsustainable due to real reasons: show me the earnings of those bubble companies?? It was a situation of 'wishful thinking' rather than realistic expectation. Due to certain reasons, I am not going to comment on my opinion of whether policy was right or wrong of Greenspan.
But a fact remains, markets are NOT a zero-sum game. Calling any players on the markets 'zero-sum' players is just plain wrong and misleading.
You know what, I'll stop picking on your terminology and I'll at least send you some interesting reading I have in my bookmarks: here.
Good luck to you.
What are you blabbering about? Mercantilists used to think that markets are a zero-sum game because wealth is limited and attached to supply of some bullshit commodity, e.g. gold. Almost all economic activity is a non-zero-sum play.
If you ar referring to e.g. equities trading as a "positive-sum" play and e.g. derivatives trading as a "zero-sum" game, you better get your facts straight.
For example with derivatives, there is reallocation of utility among participants - a benefit that makes this a positive-sum game. And an opportunity to forecast at lower transactional cost than traditional securities trading.
Simply stop hiding your vagueness in buzz-words like 'zero-sum players' and 'positive-sum players'. And stop using terminology that is outdated anyway... <hint>Pick up a few books instead.</hint>
It's not "per say", but "per se". For it comes from Latin, just like many other words in the English language. You must be an American...
And I hope that you are taking my posts as something worth discussing and not as an attempt to attack you. What we are facing is that there are problems at hand and we need to attack those.
So hopefully, you will have understanding for the fact that when my sentences seem like they are targeted personally, they are not. When I use "you", I usually mean any person having the opinion I am commenting on. I enjoy reading your insight so I will be very happy to learn new things from your reactions.
Enjoy.
Very interesting!
If you met your wife/girlfriend through a match-making service, would you dump her the moment you found someone younger, prettier, or with less expensive tastes on a Russian brides website?
I would dump her the moment I would find someone smarter, more understanding and better suited for me - provided the 'convenience' of my current relationship is not really what I need any more. But if what I need is to see my current wife happy because she is with me, I wouldn't dump her. In any case, it's about what I personally need/want - even if it involves so-called 'selfless' needs.
They will play the loyalty card every time that they want an employee to come in over the weekend, stay late into the evening, or reschedule a vacation so that they can meet the company's needs. Where is the loyalty on the part of the business?
It's called the paycheck. The company's loyalty might not end there necessarily, but it's up to people to not to let themselves get exploited. In capitalism, the businesses would love to pay $0 - that would be the best reduction in labor cost that could get. It's up to the workforce to not let that happen. And to to make that happen is not a matter of 'social responsibility', it is a matter of raising children in a certain way. That's where America is making a mistake - it forgot that new people (bluntly put) come out of people - to shape those new people is what needs to happen. Everything else will follow through as a result of that. America forgot that and it will pay the price by other economies (whether it's the European Union or Indonesia) being more successful because of this value capital. There is no point any more whining about the situation now, it's already here.
That worker's salary was contributing to the economy. He was spending it on goods and services in the U.S., unlike his foreign counterpart.
1. Yes, the worker's salary was spent in the economy - but it's not about the individual's consumption here. The salary was paid out by the wrong party - a party that was forced to spend money because they were forced to employ the person only because he was there for a number of years; money that could have been put into more efficient use (and the opportunity for businesses to spend money more efficiently helps the economy as a whole, don't you think?).
2. Don't bring up the U.S. vs. foreign argument, it's nonsense. Go look up Walmart numbers (has like a $250B GDP - bigger than Sweden or Austria), then walk down to your local Walmart (regardless of where in the world you are, there will be one within a range of max. 300 km), look at the back of the products for the "Made in" labels and please realize that even if you live in the U.S., you do NOT live in a U.S. economy any more.
Overall, you seem to have something against 'foreign' economies, 'foreign' workers, 'foreign' jobs, 'foreign' goods. Where is that xenophobia coming from? Are you fearing you'll be outsmarted, outraced, outdone, made obsolete by the 'foreign', that the 'foreign' is plotting against you? Do you follow what I'm trying to say?
1. Embrace your principles. 2. Realize reality. 3. Decide your future.
And stop whining....