Warren Buffett gave $28,500 in 2008 to democrats this year according to this site. Is that "huge scads of money"? He is "pouring even more money into their coffers"? Where do you get this stuff?
You are arguing that he is for the estate tax because he makes money on estate tax insurance. Sure. I'm sure it is has nothing to do with values about where the tax burden is least harmful. Taxes have to come from somewhere unless you want to just print money or borrow another $trillion from China.
I think the consensus on the bailout bill was that there would be catastrophic consequences for the US economy if the situation was not resolved. Do you have money in the bank (more than the then 100000 FDIC limit - btw the FDIC would go bankrupt pretty quick)? Do companies have money in banks? There was consensus among people who understood the situation that something needed to be done (except maybe Jim Rogers). The representatives risked their own re-election for the good of the public. Maybe it is a conspiracy that both candidates supported the bill and other countries are doing the same thing. Or maybe the average person does not understand our economic system. You decide. BTW I think they are getting ownership of the banks directly instead of buying debt instruments.
Buffett has been for raising the capital gains tax and I think Obama also. That is where he makes most of his money. The other way to get money out of stocks is dividends which is taxed as income. Of course you are not taxed until you sell a stock, but if you don't sell it you never get any money do you?
Business can deduct their expenses. So money used for growth is not included in "income" and is not taxed as your post would imply.
Smart people will profit from whatever the government does. I can understand disagreeing with their ideology, but suggesting that liberal multi-billionaires support raising taxes for their own FINANCIAL benefit seems a little far fetched.
I don't think anyone is talking about paying CEOs dirt here. Just, you know, moving it back closer to where it has been for years and years (and what it is still like in many other countries).
Is the best guy always going to say: "I'll do this job for $3 million a year, but if you pay me $2 million a year I'll walk away." Do you really want a guy that is so greedy that he would forget all his co-workers and probably move his family just so they could live in a $20 million dollar house (as opposed to a $10 million dollar house)? Someone to whom making as many $ for themselves in their overriding concern?
Or is he just asking his friends on the board of directors for a raise because another CEO is paid X and hey, it's free money?
I just can't believe that there wouldn't any competent people willing to do the job for reasonable pay.
The world isn't some ideal meritocracy. The US economy didn't spring into being because people adopted a "fuck you" attitude. The economy is driven by consumer spending. Wages went up, spending went up, business went up in a self-supporting cycle. Some things that artificially increased wages like unions probably helped this cycle along.
Developing countries aren't as far along in this process. Wages and spending are lower. It's ideal for wages to go up there instead of reversing the cycle in the US.
It's not just IT, support, manufacturing and engineering. Foreign companies sell directly to the US, so its the management jobs too.
The huge trade deficit is unsustainable. A big recession in the US isn't going to help anybody, China and India included. It's reasonable to discourage sending more jobs overseas. Domestic spending is the way to create sustainable jobs in China and India.
Also, your attitude might work for venture capitalists but the world needs parents too.
You could type the letters out-of-order, then rearrange them using drag+drop. Someone with a keylogger probably wouldn't bother using the mouse input to figure it out.
I'm not religious either. I think meaningfulness is a human emotion though. So all that is required for something to be meaningful to someone is that they feel it is. Of course some ways of thinking might be more practical than others.
It seems like people see more meaning in things that affect the future than things that happened in the past (although probably a lot of people are interested in history for its own sake). So of course if you look at things from the perspective of someone living in an arbitrarily distant point in the future they wont seem meaningful under this criteria.
Also, if you think of each person's life as a collection of actions each individual action has meaning (to them and others).
Isn't it a little bit strange that a human with a lifespan of approximately ~70 years would consider actions not on the scale of billions of years "pointless"? If you look at what we have discovered going down (cells,molecules,atoms,protons,quaks,etc) and up (other planets, suns, galaxies, the universe) who is to say that it doesn't go 1000 more layers in each direction, but we have limits as to what we can observe from where we are? Is everything but the most large thing "pointless"?
Meaning is not some quality residing in physical objects. It is something a person attributes to things in his environment. It seems, to me, that things on a totally different scale, that have only the slightest effect on the world we live in, are not worthy of being given more importance than anything else.
Also, people cannot live forever. Are you the same person as when you were 12 years old? Where is that person? Life is not possible without change.
I assume you don't read newspapers much (niether do I), but it's one of the few national newspaper comic strips (and, according to Wikipedia, made by a pulitzer-prize winning cartoonist). It looks like the most recent strip has been censored for political reasons (which should be obvious from it's content).
The most swearing I remember was in junior high school too. I think people cut back later because at that point the swearing doesn't mean anything and it's just a waste of time.
Canvas is 100x better suited to the poster's needs than GIMP. It's a shame that it is being neglected under it's current corporate management (few updates, no publicity). The web site hardly indicates what a general-purpose piece of graphics software it is. I can't think of something that would be better suited for the poster's needs.
I agree with your point, but I don't think Haskell is written in C (at least its main implementation, GHC). I bet there's some glue code somewhere but I think it's written in Haskell and compiled directly to machine code.
Isn't that a false dichotomy? Denying activists legal rights is better than anarchy, so therefore "revolutionaries need to be dealt with hard." It's already illegal to hack sites, etc. Why not go with the law in dealing with these offences. Or if the current laws are inadequate, why not work towards changing them? The idea that we should start breaking the law because "those guys are ruining society" seems kind of counter-intuitive.
I was looking for an internship doing application development. I really wish companies put positions right on their sign. I tried to talk to the companies that looked like they might have that sort of position, but I could have easily missed one. I don't care about trinkets/pretty signs/strippers when I am at a career fair but it looks like that is unusual. If you have to give something away you could try saving some for the end of the career fair when everyone else has run out of stuff.
They set the price to maximize their profit, it doesn't have anything to do with the cost. If they could make more money by raising prices, they would (in reality people would probably by less DVDs).
I have a 12 inch powerbook (1024x768) so I only see a couple at a time. I just tab between applications and use Expose. It makes it really easy (and fast!) to go to recently used documents and applications by just leaving them open. I have 15 applications open right now. I only really close windows or quit applications when my computer starts running too slow (fairly frequently:)).
I've made lots of small Cocoa applications on my own, and the two things that have helped me stay motivated on individual projects are:
1) Keeping them short (1-2 weeks to finish)
2) Having people to show them to
So if there is a group on your campus related to Cocoa or.NET programming I would join it. Also, it can be easy to sign up for 1-2 units of individual study credit with a professor if you have a project idea (this is a great excuse to come talk to them during office hours).
NeXT applications were able to run on multiple machines, I think. Because the apps on Mac OS are just folders, it is not too hard to put two executables in the same application. So, while developers would need to update their programs for x86, there would only be one version sold that works on both platforms.
You might want to check out Coldstone by Ambrosia. It seems to be basically what you describe, and its games are playable on MacOS 9/X and Windows. They made a fairly large commercial game using it, so it can't be that bad.
I will actually tolerate a closed system as long as there is a good reason for keeping a closed system and I know what I am buying. No one expects the firmware on an external hard disk to be upgradable by third parties, do they? With an iPod, I can buy music accessories, etc, and be reasonably certain that they are compatible and won't break with the next upgrade. As a downside I get a bit less choice, but I knew the trade off when I started. I don't ever expect to be able to play WMA files. Apple's DRM is just barely tolerated by a lot of people because it gets out of the way, and Real letting users "choose" another DRM scheme that could cause them trouble isn't necessarily a good thing.
Users "hacking" their own products is one thing, but companies hacking those products for them without making it perfectly clear what they are doing is another. I know that we always want more choice, but some people want things to just work. If Apple releases a new iPod, will they have to wait for Real to update their drivers or have people's songs break?
P.S. The DMCA is still evil, but just because Real is allowed to doesn't mean they should. This whole business is probably moot, as who would want to buy DRMed music from Real anyway?
What is the point of making huge calculators when you can basically assume a computer is available? Sure, my laptop may be a little larger than I need, but I already paid for it.
Innovation doesn't neccessarily have to be technological.
The cost for Apple is probably not the development of this software, but the risk that a new GUI system might not do well in the marketplace. There would be significantly less reason to "innovate" in this way if a competitor could copy them exactly if it was successful. Why take risks if there is nothing to gain? <br><br> Microsoft could make an <I>alternate</I> implementation of the same idea. Rather than using transparency, they could make windows shrink or collapse after inactivity, and have another visual indicator (window turning blue, title bar flashes, sound, etc.) warn of this happening. That would involve them doing thier own research and taking thier own risks.
I really hope that the movie will be animated like the cartoon. Judging by what they say about South Park, it seems likely. 3D animation, live action, or both would probably ruin it. (think Flinstones, Scooby Doo)
If any computer can be used to vote, how are the ballots kept secret? If someone's vote is observed (and they might be pressured into this by husband/wife/friend etc...) I can easily see people avoiding voting for controversial canidates, or somebody who their friends oppose.
Slashdot Mirror
Warren Buffett gave $28,500 in 2008 to democrats this year according to this site. Is that "huge scads of money"? He is "pouring even more money into their coffers"? Where do you get this stuff?
You are arguing that he is for the estate tax because he makes money on estate tax insurance. Sure. I'm sure it is has nothing to do with values about where the tax burden is least harmful. Taxes have to come from somewhere unless you want to just print money or borrow another $trillion from China.
I think the consensus on the bailout bill was that there would be catastrophic consequences for the US economy if the situation was not resolved. Do you have money in the bank (more than the then 100000 FDIC limit - btw the FDIC would go bankrupt pretty quick)? Do companies have money in banks? There was consensus among people who understood the situation that something needed to be done (except maybe Jim Rogers). The representatives risked their own re-election for the good of the public. Maybe it is a conspiracy that both candidates supported the bill and other countries are doing the same thing. Or maybe the average person does not understand our economic system. You decide. BTW I think they are getting ownership of the banks directly instead of buying debt instruments.
Buffett has been for raising the capital gains tax and I think Obama also. That is where he makes most of his money. The other way to get money out of stocks is dividends which is taxed as income. Of course you are not taxed until you sell a stock, but if you don't sell it you never get any money do you?
Business can deduct their expenses. So money used for growth is not included in "income" and is not taxed as your post would imply.
Smart people will profit from whatever the government does. I can understand disagreeing with their ideology, but suggesting that liberal multi-billionaires support raising taxes for their own FINANCIAL benefit seems a little far fetched.
But, if you pay dirt, you will get a bad CEO.
I don't think anyone is talking about paying CEOs dirt here. Just, you know, moving it back closer to where it has been for years and years (and what it is still like in many other countries).
Is the best guy always going to say: "I'll do this job for $3 million a year, but if you pay me $2 million a year I'll walk away." Do you really want a guy that is so greedy that he would forget all his co-workers and probably move his family just so they could live in a $20 million dollar house (as opposed to a $10 million dollar house)? Someone to whom making as many $ for themselves in their overriding concern?
Or is he just asking his friends on the board of directors for a raise because another CEO is paid X and hey, it's free money?
I just can't believe that there wouldn't any competent people willing to do the job for reasonable pay.
The world isn't some ideal meritocracy. The US economy didn't spring into being because people adopted a "fuck you" attitude. The economy is driven by consumer spending. Wages went up, spending went up, business went up in a self-supporting cycle. Some things that artificially increased wages like unions probably helped this cycle along.
Developing countries aren't as far along in this process. Wages and spending are lower. It's ideal for wages to go up there instead of reversing the cycle in the US.
It's not just IT, support, manufacturing and engineering. Foreign companies sell directly to the US, so its the management jobs too.
The huge trade deficit is unsustainable. A big recession in the US isn't going to help anybody, China and India included. It's reasonable to discourage sending more jobs overseas. Domestic spending is the way to create sustainable jobs in China and India.
Also, your attitude might work for venture capitalists but the world needs parents too.
You could type the letters out-of-order, then rearrange them using drag+drop. Someone with a keylogger probably wouldn't bother using the mouse input to figure it out.
I'm not religious either. I think meaningfulness is a human emotion though. So all that is required for something to be meaningful to someone is that they feel it is. Of course some ways of thinking might be more practical than others.
It seems like people see more meaning in things that affect the future than things that happened in the past (although probably a lot of people are interested in history for its own sake). So of course if you look at things from the perspective of someone living in an arbitrarily distant point in the future they wont seem meaningful under this criteria.
Also, if you think of each person's life as a collection of actions each individual action has meaning (to them and others).
Isn't it a little bit strange that a human with a lifespan of approximately ~70 years would consider actions not on the scale of billions of years "pointless"? If you look at what we have discovered going down (cells,molecules,atoms,protons,quaks,etc) and up (other planets, suns, galaxies, the universe) who is to say that it doesn't go 1000 more layers in each direction, but we have limits as to what we can observe from where we are? Is everything but the most large thing "pointless"?
Meaning is not some quality residing in physical objects. It is something a person attributes to things in his environment. It seems, to me, that things on a totally different scale, that have only the slightest effect on the world we live in, are not worthy of being given more importance than anything else.
Also, people cannot live forever. Are you the same person as when you were 12 years old? Where is that person? Life is not possible without change.
I assume you don't read newspapers much (niether do I), but it's one of the few national newspaper comic strips (and, according to Wikipedia, made by a pulitzer-prize winning cartoonist). It looks like the most recent strip has been censored for political reasons (which should be obvious from it's content).
The most swearing I remember was in junior high school too. I think people cut back later because at that point the swearing doesn't mean anything and it's just a waste of time.
Canvas is 100x better suited to the poster's needs than GIMP. It's a shame that it is being neglected under it's current corporate management (few updates, no publicity). The web site hardly indicates what a general-purpose piece of graphics software it is. I can't think of something that would be better suited for the poster's needs.
n dex.php
Here is a review:
http://www.macworld.com/2005/06/reviews/canvasx/i
I agree with your point, but I don't think Haskell is written in C (at least its main implementation, GHC). I bet there's some glue code somewhere but I think it's written in Haskell and compiled directly to machine code.
Isn't that a false dichotomy? Denying activists legal rights is better than anarchy, so therefore "revolutionaries need to be dealt with hard." It's already illegal to hack sites, etc. Why not go with the law in dealing with these offences. Or if the current laws are inadequate, why not work towards changing them? The idea that we should start breaking the law because "those guys are ruining society" seems kind of counter-intuitive.
I was looking for an internship doing application development. I really wish companies put positions right on their sign. I tried to talk to the companies that looked like they might have that sort of position, but I could have easily missed one. I don't care about trinkets/pretty signs/strippers when I am at a career fair but it looks like that is unusual. If you have to give something away you could try saving some for the end of the career fair when everyone else has run out of stuff.
They set the price to maximize their profit, it doesn't have anything to do with the cost. If they could make more money by raising prices, they would (in reality people would probably by less DVDs).
I have a 12 inch powerbook (1024x768) so I only see a couple at a time. I just tab between applications and use Expose. It makes it really easy (and fast!) to go to recently used documents and applications by just leaving them open. I have 15 applications open right now. I only really close windows or quit applications when my computer starts running too slow (fairly frequently :)).
I've made lots of small Cocoa applications on my own, and the two things that have helped me stay motivated on individual projects are:
.NET programming I would join it. Also, it can be easy to sign up for 1-2 units of individual study credit with a professor if you have a project idea (this is a great excuse to come talk to them during office hours).
1) Keeping them short (1-2 weeks to finish)
2) Having people to show them to
So if there is a group on your campus related to Cocoa or
NeXT applications were able to run on multiple machines, I think. Because the apps on Mac OS are just folders, it is not too hard to put two executables in the same application. So, while developers would need to update their programs for x86, there would only be one version sold that works on both platforms.
Gentoo and Mandrake have PPC ports (but Mandrake's might be out of date).
You might want to check out Coldstone by Ambrosia. It seems to be basically what you describe, and its games are playable on MacOS 9/X and Windows. They made a fairly large commercial game using it, so it can't be that bad.
I will actually tolerate a closed system as long as there is a good reason for keeping a closed system and I know what I am buying. No one expects the firmware on an external hard disk to be upgradable by third parties, do they? With an iPod, I can buy music accessories, etc, and be reasonably certain that they are compatible and won't break with the next upgrade. As a downside I get a bit less choice, but I knew the trade off when I started. I don't ever expect to be able to play WMA files. Apple's DRM is just barely tolerated by a lot of people because it gets out of the way, and Real letting users "choose" another DRM scheme that could cause them trouble isn't necessarily a good thing.
Users "hacking" their own products is one thing, but companies hacking those products for them without making it perfectly clear what they are doing is another. I know that we always want more choice, but some people want things to just work. If Apple releases a new iPod, will they have to wait for Real to update their drivers or have people's songs break?
P.S. The DMCA is still evil, but just because Real is allowed to doesn't mean they should. This whole business is probably moot, as who would want to buy DRMed music from Real anyway?
Qonos: $350
Mathematica (for students): $130
What is the point of making huge calculators when you can basically assume a computer is available?
Sure, my laptop may be a little larger than I need, but I already paid for it.
Innovation doesn't neccessarily have to be technological.
The cost for Apple is probably not the development of this software, but the risk that a new GUI system might not do well in the marketplace. There would be significantly less reason to "innovate" in this way if a competitor could copy them exactly if it was successful. Why take risks if there is nothing to gain?
<br><br>
Microsoft could make an <I>alternate</I> implementation of the same idea. Rather than using transparency, they could make windows shrink or collapse after inactivity, and have another visual indicator (window turning blue, title bar flashes, sound, etc.) warn of this happening. That would involve them doing thier own research and taking thier own risks.
The article says that after the first 3 months the price will be $39.95, which is about $40/month rather than $50/month.
Maybe its time for apple to ressurect the Newton?
I really hope that the movie will be animated like the cartoon. Judging by what they say about South Park, it seems likely. 3D animation, live action, or both would probably ruin it. (think Flinstones, Scooby Doo)
If any computer can be used to vote, how are the ballots kept secret? If someone's vote is observed (and they might be pressured into this by husband/wife/friend etc...) I can easily see people avoiding voting for controversial canidates, or somebody who their friends oppose.