Well, you and your family could get a Verizon family share plan with 1000 minutes for $70 and free mobile to mobile. I talk to my wife everyday at least once during lunch time and don't have to worry about running over or counting days till the end of month.
Chances are some of your friends will have Verizon too. You'll get good signal quality, good customer service and no need to ask people to "call you back", you can talk to you wife as much as you can. And no I don't work for them. I switched to Verizon after having ATT a while back and getting screwed with a huge bill, insance roaming charges while on vacation (I also got free roaming with V.) and only 500 minutes for about the same price.
From a technology point of view there are certain limitations that cannot be overcome. GSM was standardized in Europe by goverment control because they thought CDMA was imposible. Then Qualcomm developed the technology. It is much more efficient. So when it comes to fast data transmission, CDMA has more room for improvement. That means more customers, talking and sending data at the same time at a faster speed = profit. As of now GSM is still good enough, but in the future the US GSM companies are already looking at UMTS, which is CDMA based = big costs converting a lot of infrastructure, make no mistake they will pass that on to customers one way or another.
This is a good read with illustration and such:
umtsworld
I didn't know, it must be a recent feature. But I think the phones still don't work like real 'walkie-talies' they still have to go to the nearest cell tower. So if you are out in the woods, you still can't use it. But if you can reach a cell tower, why not just call other?
Well many companies used, imagine a construction company and you don't have unlimited minutes to minutes and you need to have 10 people on one channel talking getting the order right there and then. I suspect that is what Sprint wants, the large Nextel contract with the many companies.
But year "push to talk" is just stupid from a personal point of view, this is 21st century people should be just talking to each other over videophones soon.
CMDA is more efficient and I think Motorola is the only builder of the iDen technology equipment, while CDMA stuff is built by many companies (especially in Asia), even though Qualcomm still holds the CDMA patents. I've heard that CDMA is the next gen technology and that eventually even Cingular+ATT will have to migrate if they want to keep up (UMTS is a wideband CDMA) so that means huge costs for GSM providers to replace their equipment.
I'll stick (or should I say - I am stuck for 2 yrs. ) to Verzon, == the Microsoft of wireless, for now. They are in the best position from engineering/technology point of view.
Sprint and Nextel have different infrastructures. Sprint is CDMA (like Verizon) and Nextel uses a Motorola proprietary standard. It would have made sense for Sprint and Verizon to merge.
Would they have to privide dual chipset phones to take advantage of all the Nextel infrastructure? I suspect Motorola will lose out, because CDMA seems to be better suited for the future and is used more widely. Nextel will probably be converted to CDMA and Sprint will get the huge Nextel corporate contracts as soon as it can implement the local "walkie-talkie" feature that Nextel customers love so much.
Ah, yes, the confused liberal who can't see things objectively.
Courses that universities offer are online. So I suppose a search on Google would provide many links to some of the courses I mentioned and more.
Where in my post did I ever refer to persecution of anyone? The idea was that most of the professors in the academia, while claiming to not "preach" any ideology and who are supposedly just "encouraging discussion" are actually implicitly and explicitly pushing their mostly liberal ideology onto the students.
Again, nobody is persecuting anyone, don't know where you got that from. Am I persecuting you by calling you a "liberal" and using stupid sarcasm? If that is persecution, then you need to look up what real persecution is (Google can be there to help).
You say that schools don't teach Greek philosophy they teach 'about' it. How do you teach _about_ a topic without teaching the topic? How is that different than teaching _about_ Christian or Muslim philosophical thought? Try seriously teaching about political science and not teach political science.
Greek philosophy and ideology can be a religion depending how you look at it. It deals with life after death (check), it deals with existence/non-existence of gods(check) and souls(check), as well as practical matters -- what are the important virtues and what are not. Plato, Socrtates, Aristotle and other classics would all probably say that they are religious men (not too many atheists in those days), so when they write, they assume the reader is also one. What stops me from believing in Greek gods and then also subscribing to Platonic after-life, existence of souls, then I can practice all the virtues they mention. Is that less religious than being a Buddhist?
But anyway, I realize that nobody would believe in that as a religion, it was just an example to make the point.
You can be on either side and if you are an extremist you can be just as ugly and nasty. The evangelicals are running the govt. and the liberals are running the academia. I think I'll stay away from both.
Ian, I agree with you. That is why I use Python, it has a good library and takes less time to map a problem to the Python language than it does to map it to C++, or Java.
But I was replying to someone who said that "some languages are faster than others". I mentioned that very often it is the choice of the algorithm that matters. Granted, in a web application there will not be too many algorithms with nested "for" loops and such, but since we don't know what the "large web application" does I was talking in general about programming practices. When I think of programming in my field I usually have to implement an algorithm or come up with a new one. I was working in C++ then Java then I found Python. I can spend less time coding in python and think more about the overall complexity.
Unfortunately (or fortunately) for me, application development for me still has the mathematical and complexity part, I do like it...
If only everything taught in the classroom was science...
Somehow your statement should also apply to the ultra-liberal propaganda that most college professors advocate explicitly and implicitly.
If you say that literature and philosophy are not science then you can and should teach non-science in classroom, why choose one non-science as opposed to the other.
If you say that they are not science, then you can teach non-science topics in classroom.
Also let's imagine that someone would propose a new course at some university that would study early Christian philosophy. Just a look through and analysis of ideas and trends and how it borrowed from Greek philosphy and Judaic background and such. Do you think most universities would approve of that? But why not? They teach Greek philosophy, that talks just as much about Gods, souls and afterlife. Some teach courses on wiccan practices, native american mysticism and other courses that are just as "religious" and just as "scientific" as reading John of Damascus. You would think if they already teach religious stuff in classrooms, they would mostly choose to teach Christianity scince that is what most of the Americans believe. You need to know what most of your countrymen believe whether you agree with them or not (maybe you want to argue with them and hate them -- even more reason to know what those "nuts" think).
I would prefer to not have any religion and philosphy at the university. I'd rather take one more math or comps sci course. If I want to read Plato, or wiccan books or even John of Damascus, I'll just do that in my own time.
Seriously though, why is this happening to the shuttles all of the sudden. By "this" I mean one blows up, then they spend time and money to investigate and fix the problem, then when they are just about to take off a window cover falls off and hits a wing and nobody knows how that happened, then the fuel sensors don't work, then the foam still falls during the launch and strikes the shuttle (the very problem they supposedly wanted to fix), then while in orbit they notice the filler sticking out.
Is this just normal business for NASA or did stuff just go downhill in the last couple of years? What did they do during all that time since they lost the shuttle, when they were supposed to have been fixing the foam problem? It seems they added some cameras and sensors and that is about it. The foam keeps falling and more problems have appeared along the way.
If their policy doesn't agree to what you believe the best way to protest is to sell your shares and invest in other company. Nothing speaks louder than $$$. Cisco can put out ads on TV how much they support human rights, they can sponsor human rights campagns for the PR and so on but as long as the Chinese give the $$$ it will also sponsor censorship. It is an entity that exists for the sole purpose to make money. Therefore the best way to control it is to stop investing in it and thus reduce its potential of making money.
I often see people in US, the most capitalistic country in the world (this might start a flame war but I'll say it anyway, that is how I see it), who believe that somehow all these companies have morals and are actually trying to change the world for the better even if it means taking a loss. They view companies as they would like to view individuals: honest, charitable, friendly and in general, very nice. Companies will go to great lengths to project that image onto the public. But the reality is that their only goal is to make money. If something doesn't make money - it is not worth doing, it has nothing to do with morals or principles. Even Cisco's self-imposed resolution to not cooperate with oppresive governments is there to keep people like you happy and investing in them, if they can also get away with cooperating with China and make money off of that, they'll do that too.
Sometimes the goverment or the people (through legislature) step in and put "the smack down". Have you noticed how Phillip Morris started airing all these "smoking is bad for you" ads - it is not because they are nice and want to help and educate, they are just "making the public aware" as to avoid paying another settlement, they know that those who are addicted and smoke will not look at the ad and say, "oh crap, so this is actually bad for me! I better quit right now!".
You are right, performance from the language point of view is won by assembler, but often it is the choice of the algorithm that will make the big difference. A bubble sort in assembler of 1 million items might be slower than a quicksort of the same million items in python.
Often when someone asks the question "what languages do you know?" or "what languages are the best?" it shows a lack of CS background and experience. The right question is "what programming paradigm would you use?" or "what programming paradigm is better?" (Of course when you come down to a specific problem, then the choice of libraries might determine the language, but the original poster only specified "large web application" as the requirement so talking about a specific language is pointless).
The difference between the two questions underlies the difference between the two types of education most programmers have. Some have gone to 4 year colleges and got a "Computer Science" degree, while some learned a language in their spare time, or went to technical college. The people from the technical college will know just one language and ask others what langues are the best, what languages they use etc. To them learning a new language hard. What a CS degree teaches (or should teach) is different programming paradigms - procedural, functional, object oriented, along with an algorithms and data structures. So if someone knows how to think in terms of objects when they solve the problem they can program in java, c++, python, ruby and other object oriented languages.
I used C++ in college, then I learned Java, now I use primarily Python. All I had to do is learn the syntax and some of the common library functions -- all can be done with a good reference book and/or Google in a couple of weeks.
Or if a problem can be better solved with a functional approach, I would use Prolog or Lisp (you can use Lisp for websites too!).
So, I think the original question should have specified the problem more exact or ask about what paradigm would be better. Rather than give a general requirement ("large web application") but then then ask for a specific language. This is bound to lead to nothing but arguments of why everyone's favorite language is best and that's about it.
I don't think they talk about ntp. They talk about 10e-12 fraction of a second (or better?) type synchronization that is used for GPS for example. NTP is useless for that, it is like trying to sychronize hundredths of a second using carrier pigeons.
Yeah but still they can get the patent on it first then they can start thinking about production. That is why it is just a design studio not a hardware company. I am sure this would look interesting to people at Alienware or Belkin or even Microsoft. It is good for games, would be great for an IDE, or Photoshop and many other uses.
Actually I just thought of another idea, why not use the keyboard as a small console display as well. This could be used as a portable console in administering and fixing rack-mounted servers. The keyboard can have a small screen that will show about 10-20 lines of a terminal and also the keys would dynamically change to reflect various connection and management functions. For example after pressing "F1" the layout of the keyboard changes and now the keys to reflect a new submenu. If the key is not pressed but just slightly touched the console will display a short help message.
This would be one expensive keyboard but people who have the money to blow might be interested...
Before it does there is a mandotory alarm saying "oh the humanity". When you hear that comming from a car in the parking lot run the other way.
Seriously though, using water directly might not yield as much H but it is a much simpler process. If a nuclear plant is built then the electricity and distilled water is all you need to get some hydrogen. With this company's process you have to get the sodium from somewhere, then the silica gel. Anyone know of any pure sodium lingering around ready to be picked up, what about silica gel. All those chemicals need to be prepared, the energy to do so might as well be used to electrolize waterp.
I personally would like to see more nuclear power plants being built in this country. Then we can use the electricity anyway we want.
Same goes for some of the medical equipment. Some MRIs and such have often some UNIX variant installed to control them. As a general observation I would say that in a critical environment Unix/Linux systems are preffered over MS Windows. Somehow just that fact says something about the qualities of both systems.
I used to have a Windows partition until 2 days ago when my IBM 60GXP "Deathstar" died with the infamous click-o-death. I don't think I will bother installing Windows again. The _only_ thing I was using it is to play the latest games, so I'll have to do without that. My main operating system is Ubuntu Linux - very nice distro, fell in love with it at the first sight. For me Linux reached the point where I would use it on a Desktop instead of Windows.
Every sensor has a test circuit that tests to see if it works or not. So the test circuit would set the fuel sensor so a pricular setting (full/empty) then the reading is taken if they don't match for every value then, either the test circuit is broken or the sensor if broken. Also initially they know how much LH or LO they put in the tank so if any sensors don't show that amount they are out of wack, if they show the right ammount they still can be out of wack but that is why you need the test circuit. That kind of stuff if done on airplanes and other critical system, each sensor has a test circuit connected to it.
Why not just put in 10 sensors and as long as 3 or 4 are working then go ahead launch. That probably would be cheaper than missing the funding they will loose because of percieved incompetency. Or just don't announce any launch dates until a couple of hours before when everything is working right.
I know they are being safe but all this back and forth ("we are launching! - we are not launching!") is looking really bad from the public's point of view. And the problem then is that it is the public's tax money that is being spent for such things.
It is like the American people "ordered" a shuttle to be built and launched. They already paid for it (billions and billions of dollars) and then the engineers keep saying "whoops - the window cover fell off, damaged some tiles, and we don't even know why", "whoops - a fuel sensor is not working, gotta delay for another month" and so on.
I know they have good engineers but the perception is that they are incompetent.
Someone will respond saying that it is already because of lack of funding that this is happening, I would agree and say that it is probably a vicious circle but I will aslo add that better management and better engineering is also needed.
I think it is "cool" to bach Itanic on Slashdot not just because it is from the "big guy" but because most people here know the real value and the real performance numbers of the hardware. Most people simply own an AMD because it offers better performance at a lower price - as simple as that. In my oppinion AMD already beat Intel in the 64bit consumer processor market and also is beating it in the double-core offerings (try buying a double core Intel processor off pricewatch for the price of a double core offering from AMD with the better performance). And geeks on Slashdot will "side" with the chipmaker whose chips they have bought.
In other words I don't really see AMD as the "small guy" that needs support and pity. I just root for the brand I chose because I did the research and spent my money well. You root for the guy that you chose and spent your (your company's) money on.
Tomorrow if Intel comes on top with a better processor for me, I will go and buy an Intel product, or VIA or whatever gets my job done faster and cheaper.
Their hardware might be really good but the days of every hardware company making its own OS and applications is long gone. Software is just as important. So now hardware companies have to release products that will run the existing software and have room for future improvement. Intel when it released the 64 bit Itanium was still living in the 80s thinking it was controlling the computer market. Also in the late 80's and early 90's there wasn't as much software around a lot of companies could afford to switch to a new platform, today it is much much harder to do it.
I think AMD has clearly won the market in terms of the consumer 64bit processor. And I can buy a double-core AMD today but I couldn't get a double-core Intel offering for a good price.
I was just perpetuating the typical relationship stereotype. My wife does love me for who I am (go figure!) but she still doesn't shy away from chocolates, flowers and Starbucks mochas once in a while - and I am glad to make her happy!
Sometimes the nice girl doesn't even want the millions, but the ones on the corner always want their $50 dollars or some big guy with a large sparkly hat comes and beats me up - go figure...;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Chances are some of your friends will have Verizon too. You'll get good signal quality, good customer service and no need to ask people to "call you back", you can talk to you wife as much as you can. And no I don't work for them. I switched to Verizon after having ATT a while back and getting screwed with a huge bill, insance roaming charges while on vacation (I also got free roaming with V.) and only 500 minutes for about the same price.
This is a good read with illustration and such: umtsworld
I didn't know, it must be a recent feature. But I think the phones still don't work like real 'walkie-talies' they still have to go to the nearest cell tower. So if you are out in the woods, you still can't use it. But if you can reach a cell tower, why not just call other?
But year "push to talk" is just stupid from a personal point of view, this is 21st century people should be just talking to each other over videophones soon.
I'll stick (or should I say - I am stuck for 2 yrs. ) to Verzon, == the Microsoft of wireless, for now. They are in the best position from engineering/technology point of view.
Would they have to privide dual chipset phones to take advantage of all the Nextel infrastructure? I suspect Motorola will lose out, because CDMA seems to be better suited for the future and is used more widely. Nextel will probably be converted to CDMA and Sprint will get the huge Nextel corporate contracts as soon as it can implement the local "walkie-talkie" feature that Nextel customers love so much.
Courses that universities offer are online. So I suppose a search on Google would provide many links to some of the courses I mentioned and more.
Where in my post did I ever refer to persecution of anyone? The idea was that most of the professors in the academia, while claiming to not "preach" any ideology and who are supposedly just "encouraging discussion" are actually implicitly and explicitly pushing their mostly liberal ideology onto the students.
Again, nobody is persecuting anyone, don't know where you got that from. Am I persecuting you by calling you a "liberal" and using stupid sarcasm? If that is persecution, then you need to look up what real persecution is (Google can be there to help).
You say that schools don't teach Greek philosophy they teach 'about' it. How do you teach _about_ a topic without teaching the topic? How is that different than teaching _about_ Christian or Muslim philosophical thought? Try seriously teaching about political science and not teach political science.
Greek philosophy and ideology can be a religion depending how you look at it. It deals with life after death (check), it deals with existence/non-existence of gods(check) and souls(check), as well as practical matters -- what are the important virtues and what are not. Plato, Socrtates, Aristotle and other classics would all probably say that they are religious men (not too many atheists in those days), so when they write, they assume the reader is also one. What stops me from believing in Greek gods and then also subscribing to Platonic after-life, existence of souls, then I can practice all the virtues they mention. Is that less religious than being a Buddhist?
But anyway, I realize that nobody would believe in that as a religion, it was just an example to make the point.
You can be on either side and if you are an extremist you can be just as ugly and nasty. The evangelicals are running the govt. and the liberals are running the academia. I think I'll stay away from both.
But I was replying to someone who said that "some languages are faster than others". I mentioned that very often it is the choice of the algorithm that matters. Granted, in a web application there will not be too many algorithms with nested "for" loops and such, but since we don't know what the "large web application" does I was talking in general about programming practices. When I think of programming in my field I usually have to implement an algorithm or come up with a new one. I was working in C++ then Java then I found Python. I can spend less time coding in python and think more about the overall complexity.
Unfortunately (or fortunately) for me, application development for me still has the mathematical and complexity part, I do like it...
Somehow your statement should also apply to the ultra-liberal propaganda that most college professors advocate explicitly and implicitly.
If you say that literature and philosophy are not science then you can and should teach non-science in classroom, why choose one non-science as opposed to the other.
If you say that they are not science, then you can teach non-science topics in classroom.
Also let's imagine that someone would propose a new course at some university that would study early Christian philosophy. Just a look through and analysis of ideas and trends and how it borrowed from Greek philosphy and Judaic background and such. Do you think most universities would approve of that? But why not? They teach Greek philosophy, that talks just as much about Gods, souls and afterlife. Some teach courses on wiccan practices, native american mysticism and other courses that are just as "religious" and just as "scientific" as reading John of Damascus. You would think if they already teach religious stuff in classrooms, they would mostly choose to teach Christianity scince that is what most of the Americans believe. You need to know what most of your countrymen believe whether you agree with them or not (maybe you want to argue with them and hate them -- even more reason to know what those "nuts" think).
I would prefer to not have any religion and philosphy at the university. I'd rather take one more math or comps sci course. If I want to read Plato, or wiccan books or even John of Damascus, I'll just do that in my own time.
Is this just normal business for NASA or did stuff just go downhill in the last couple of years? What did they do during all that time since they lost the shuttle, when they were supposed to have been fixing the foam problem? It seems they added some cameras and sensors and that is about it. The foam keeps falling and more problems have appeared along the way.
I often see people in US, the most capitalistic country in the world (this might start a flame war but I'll say it anyway, that is how I see it), who believe that somehow all these companies have morals and are actually trying to change the world for the better even if it means taking a loss. They view companies as they would like to view individuals: honest, charitable, friendly and in general, very nice. Companies will go to great lengths to project that image onto the public. But the reality is that their only goal is to make money. If something doesn't make money - it is not worth doing, it has nothing to do with morals or principles. Even Cisco's self-imposed resolution to not cooperate with oppresive governments is there to keep people like you happy and investing in them, if they can also get away with cooperating with China and make money off of that, they'll do that too.
Sometimes the goverment or the people (through legislature) step in and put "the smack down". Have you noticed how Phillip Morris started airing all these "smoking is bad for you" ads - it is not because they are nice and want to help and educate, they are just "making the public aware" as to avoid paying another settlement, they know that those who are addicted and smoke will not look at the ad and say, "oh crap, so this is actually bad for me! I better quit right now!".
Often when someone asks the question "what languages do you know?" or "what languages are the best?" it shows a lack of CS background and experience. The right question is "what programming paradigm would you use?" or "what programming paradigm is better?" (Of course when you come down to a specific problem, then the choice of libraries might determine the language, but the original poster only specified "large web application" as the requirement so talking about a specific language is pointless).
The difference between the two questions underlies the difference between the two types of education most programmers have. Some have gone to 4 year colleges and got a "Computer Science" degree, while some learned a language in their spare time, or went to technical college. The people from the technical college will know just one language and ask others what langues are the best, what languages they use etc. To them learning a new language hard. What a CS degree teaches (or should teach) is different programming paradigms - procedural, functional, object oriented, along with an algorithms and data structures. So if someone knows how to think in terms of objects when they solve the problem they can program in java, c++, python, ruby and other object oriented languages.
I used C++ in college, then I learned Java, now I use primarily Python. All I had to do is learn the syntax and some of the common library functions -- all can be done with a good reference book and/or Google in a couple of weeks.
Or if a problem can be better solved with a functional approach, I would use Prolog or Lisp (you can use Lisp for websites too!).
So, I think the original question should have specified the problem more exact or ask about what paradigm would be better. Rather than give a general requirement ("large web application") but then then ask for a specific language. This is bound to lead to nothing but arguments of why everyone's favorite language is best and that's about it.
I don't think they talk about ntp. They talk about 10e-12 fraction of a second (or better?) type synchronization that is used for GPS for example. NTP is useless for that, it is like trying to sychronize hundredths of a second using carrier pigeons.
Ok, ok ... I just wanted to use the word "pirouhette"
Someone moderate parent as funny!
Actually I just thought of another idea, why not use the keyboard as a small console display as well. This could be used as a portable console in administering and fixing rack-mounted servers. The keyboard can have a small screen that will show about 10-20 lines of a terminal and also the keys would dynamically change to reflect various connection and management functions. For example after pressing "F1" the layout of the keyboard changes and now the keys to reflect a new submenu. If the key is not pressed but just slightly touched the console will display a short help message.
This would be one expensive keyboard but people who have the money to blow might be interested...
Seriously though, using water directly might not yield as much H but it is a much simpler process. If a nuclear plant is built then the electricity and distilled water is all you need to get some hydrogen. With this company's process you have to get the sodium from somewhere, then the silica gel. Anyone know of any pure sodium lingering around ready to be picked up, what about silica gel. All those chemicals need to be prepared, the energy to do so might as well be used to electrolize waterp. I personally would like to see more nuclear power plants being built in this country. Then we can use the electricity anyway we want.
I used to have a Windows partition until 2 days ago when my IBM 60GXP "Deathstar" died with the infamous click-o-death. I don't think I will bother installing Windows again. The _only_ thing I was using it is to play the latest games, so I'll have to do without that. My main operating system is Ubuntu Linux - very nice distro, fell in love with it at the first sight. For me Linux reached the point where I would use it on a Desktop instead of Windows.
Every sensor has a test circuit that tests to see if it works or not. So the test circuit would set the fuel sensor so a pricular setting (full/empty) then the reading is taken if they don't match for every value then, either the test circuit is broken or the sensor if broken. Also initially they know how much LH or LO they put in the tank so if any sensors don't show that amount they are out of wack, if they show the right ammount they still can be out of wack but that is why you need the test circuit. That kind of stuff if done on airplanes and other critical system, each sensor has a test circuit connected to it.
I know they are being safe but all this back and forth ("we are launching! - we are not launching!") is looking really bad from the public's point of view. And the problem then is that it is the public's tax money that is being spent for such things.
It is like the American people "ordered" a shuttle to be built and launched. They already paid for it (billions and billions of dollars) and then the engineers keep saying "whoops - the window cover fell off, damaged some tiles, and we don't even know why", "whoops - a fuel sensor is not working, gotta delay for another month" and so on. I know they have good engineers but the perception is that they are incompetent.
Someone will respond saying that it is already because of lack of funding that this is happening, I would agree and say that it is probably a vicious circle but I will aslo add that better management and better engineering is also needed.
Code 000 - blow the shit up
code 414 - start praying
Code 069 - instantly order 20 virgins to be available in the afterlife
Code 514 - check Slashdot for the latest counteterorrist techonology
Code 300 - send 'w00t' to Papa Osama
In other words I don't really see AMD as the "small guy" that needs support and pity. I just root for the brand I chose because I did the research and spent my money well. You root for the guy that you chose and spent your (your company's) money on.
Tomorrow if Intel comes on top with a better processor for me, I will go and buy an Intel product, or VIA or whatever gets my job done faster and cheaper.
I think AMD has clearly won the market in terms of the consumer 64bit processor. And I can buy a double-core AMD today but I couldn't get a double-core Intel offering for a good price.
I was just perpetuating the typical relationship stereotype. My wife does love me for who I am (go figure!) but she still doesn't shy away from chocolates, flowers and Starbucks mochas once in a while - and I am glad to make her happy!
Sometimes the nice girl doesn't even want the millions, but the ones on the corner always want their $50 dollars or some big guy with a large sparkly hat comes and beats me up - go figure... ;-)