During a recession, companies cut costs, and technology is one of the areas where companies cut costs the most (granted not as much as 10 years ago, but the drop will still be consequent). So yes, if a recession comes, the tech industry, like most other sectors, will get hit.
This doesn't invalidate in any way the rest of your comment thought.
The rate of inflation is between 11% and 19% a year since the 90s. Almost all long term investments lose value based on dollar affordability. Bullshit, inflation has never been above 5% since the 90s.
Remember, stagflation is good for hoarders. What a dumb thing to say... Stagflation is the combination of a stagnating economy with high inflation... the "hoarders" are the ones who lose much...
By the way, you do know that the US hasn't suffered deflation since the 70's? (And even back then it was very very low and didn't last longer then a year).
Anyone who "hoards" for a long period of time is just plain dumb.
Modded insightful? That post is completely absurd.
Recessions don't exist based on some Keynesian model (I'd love to know which one by the way, since most of Keynes' work was done in response to the great depression), and therefore it somehow transforms into reality? (Those are what? Imaginary? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions )
Yes wealth can be created and destroyed, economy is _not_ a Zero-Sum Game.
Of course, the reality is that the central banks have been creating credit for one specific reason: to transfer wealth from the poor and middle class to the bank-connected elites.
Access to credit greatly improves living conditions for who? The middle class. (And the subprimes greatly improves the living conditions of the poor) Imagine the world for the middle class was there no credit, just for the housing. You'd keep putting money aside your whole life to be able to buy a house when you're close to retirement, imagine all the value lost for yourself if you had to wait that long instead of taking a loan...
The wealthy have been hoarding money for decades?
Are you serious? Why would someone keep their money in a vault (Return = 1 - inflation) when they can make much more money by investing in risk free securities (Short Term Gov. Bonds)? Being rich is all about investing in the market (whether it's through starting a business or investing in others), please show me one "rich" man who stacks his money in a vault... If you had kept your money (lets say $100) in a "vault" the last 50 years, you'd still have $100 dollars today (please note that 100 dollars back then is worth about 2500 dollars now), if you had put these same 100 dollars in equity, you'd have 45.000 dollars now... but yeah, stack your money in a vault, that's a real good investment.
Credit is NOT tight because those who have it don't want to risk letting the middle class earn it to invest it in their own wealth-growth schemes (please notice that he somehow abandoned the idea of rich people stacking their money), but because the risk premium on the market is growing (AKA Credit Spreads), therefore the creditors lend money only to people with better profiles, and ask a greater risk premium, this is a normal consequence of a slowing economy, since the risk taken by creditors is higher.
So if you're an OSS or a closed-source developer, and you're hurting, remember for the next time another bubble grows: stay out of it.
Oh yeah because bubbles are so easy to predict... All those analysts working in banks and other investment firms are just idiots, dada21 knows better.
God you should stick to IT, you obviously know nothing about economy...
Geekcorps has partnered with Intel Emerging Markets Group in Intel's "Discover the PC" initiative focused on delivering products and technologies that are specifically designed to meet the unique needs of people in emerging markets. http://www.geekcorps.org/partners/
Okay, after being forced to dive into the sources by lousy reporting, here is the story:
Now, on Geekcorps' website, of one their technology partners is listed as Intel. Funny how you failed to mention that Geekcorp is not just a technology partner, but that Geekcorp is working with Intel to develop a competing product.
And that's why it's the reader's responsibility to consider what he or she is reading, and perform due diligence in verifying what is said.
By due diligence you mean that the reader should check if the author is not working for the competition? I mean, one of the first things I've been told when writing my thesis is to check the credibility of the authors of my sources...
Sorry to put it bluntly, your point is completely absurd, who gives criticism is completely relevant, since their position has a grand impact on how they themselves perceive events.
you got much further then me... I abandoned this passage;
In fact, there's no such thing as a perfect anything - whether in the world of computers or outside of it. Everything is imperfect. If you want perfect, then die. If the Christians are right, you might go to heaven and witness perfection. I wouldn't bet my life on it though. How can anyone be taken seriously after such a remark?
If you do not want to play games and all you need is office, mail, some MP3-ed music and watching an odd DVD that is more than enough. You won't be watching many DVDs on this one though...
Re:corepirate nazi execrable vs. creators
on
Negroponte vs Intel
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
Ron Paul wants to reinstate the Gold Standard... IMHO, anyone who can possibly want to revert to that outdated system just cannot be taken seriously...
You could argue the same thing about all fundamental research... But how much of todays practical applications would have been discovered if we hadn't sponsored research in quantum physics?
Now of course the direct link between Hubble telescope and daily applications is less obvious, but it did determine the Hubble constant (well a more accurate estimate) and determined that the expansion of the universe was accelerating... Now you can challenge the usefulness of these discoveries all you can, but I somehow believe that in the long run, understanding the physics that rule this universe will generate vastly more practical applications (and revenues) then the current (and already beaten) missile defense system...
In the long run we're all dead, but that doesn't mean we should focus solely on short term objectives (and I'm very very glad our ancestors didn't)/
Marketing is a societal process that is needed to discern consumers' wants; focusing on a product/service to those wants, and to mould the consumers towards the products/services. Marketing is fundamental to any businesses growth. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing )
Marketing *should* be about trying to find out what consumers want in order for the company to meet their needs. You know, the whole "customer driven business" thing... Of course now it's more about making the customer *believe* you're listening to his needs, rather to actually listen to them...
I'm from Belgium, and here there are a lot of parties. The orange (catholics), the blue (they seem to be for the people not working for the state, people who like to keep as much money they earn), the red (the socialists, but do not think this is some kind of communism, the world is not black & white you know;) ), the greens, and so on...
When the elections are over, the winning party needs to form a government, and they do this by making a coalition with one or two other parties so they represent more than 50% of the voting people in the country. This way all major opinions should be represented in a government. A new party might not be a part of a new government, but they are able to use there representation power in the parlement, for example when new laws are discussed and voted for.
Well, I'm from Belgium as well, and our electoral system is one of the worst ones around! For these reasons:
- As a resident of Flanders, I can only vote for Flemish parties, this means that, at best, I'm only allowed to vote for a bit more then half the decisions made in this country... This means that I, being Flemish, can only vote for Flemish interests, how absurd is that?
- Up until a month ago, the 3 major tendencies (Liberals, Conservatives/Catholics/Humanists and socialists) were all in the government (either regional or national), and guess what, we will now have the same 3 tendencies (except for the Flemish socialists) in our future government! How is it exactly that the people chose if everyone is still in the government anyways?
- Whatever party you chose, you _know_ that they won't be able to fulfill what they promised us, since they will have to make a coalition and find middle solution for everything anyways...
The Belgian system in all its glory has become a particracy, where the heads of the different political parties have much more to say about who rules what then the people. Our system is probably one of the most anti-democratic systems there is around, and this had grave consequences... In Flanders up until the last elections, the biggest party was an extreme rights party (well duh, they're the only opposition), in Walloon, the French socialists have had their hands on on local and regional matters for the best part of the last and the beginning of this century, leading to corruption scandal after corruption scandal, and since they have only been thought to think for themselves, their education system is so lame language wise that most of them never even get a chance at working in the Flemish part. Our country became just two cultures stuck together round a common economic interest (Brussels), without any prospect of ever forming a true nation.
For example, as we know it there are some parameters in the standard model of physics that have to be set just right in order for the universe as it is currently set to exist. That is for the strength of the gravitational force, magnetic force, atomic etc.
Yeah and if those constants where different, the universe would be completely different and we probably wouldn't be there to describe it as a miracle... That argument is circular because there is absolutely no reason for us to assume the current laws that structure our universe are in any way better then an imaginary alternative.
One thing you also forgot to mention is that the standard model also predicts randomness. If there is randomness in the universe, it is impossible to predict the future, if it is impossible to predict the future, then in no way is it possible for a superior being to intend our existence in this universe, and therefore it is rationally impossible for us to even start thinking that we are the people "chosen" by God.
But back to the topic, it is not the role of science to make irrational assumptions such as the existence of a magical superior entity. Until something tangible brings science towards that assumption of course. It is also not the role of science to give any credit to such assumptions, since all they do is waste time (there is an infinite amount of unprovable assumptions that we can make). This attempt to reconcile faith and science is quite absurd, but it might be necessary, seeing the role the IDers/creationists are taking in the American society. If history is any indication, every time such a fundamentalist movement has gained power in any civilization (Romans, Persians, etc... ), it was followed by a steep decline in scientific progress (just think about how many Persian Nobel prizes have been awarded, when they are at the root of mathematics (the 0, decimal numbering, algebra, astronomy,... )).
In the end, most of the economy is driven by scientific progress, so it's a matter of survival for modern economies to guide their societies towards real, rigorous science.
This of course doesn't mean we should exclude religion, far from it, it just means that we should teach and put a stress on scientific methods, while leaving individuals completely free to make any assumption they want to make. As long as the merits of science are recognized by a society, this society will go forward.
Well the University of Ghent is one of the most advanced oncology research centers... I guess what's new is not the method itself, but the fact that hospitals are starting to buy these (for operating leverage?)...
Slashdot Mirror
During a recession, companies cut costs, and technology is one of the areas where companies cut costs the most (granted not as much as 10 years ago, but the drop will still be consequent). So yes, if a recession comes, the tech industry, like most other sectors, will get hit.
This doesn't invalidate in any way the rest of your comment thought.
Know what? Write a paper with your brilliant discoveries, if you manage to back what you say, you will certainly be the next Nobel Price in economics.
By the way, you do know that the US hasn't suffered deflation since the 70's? (And even back then it was very very low and didn't last longer then a year).
Anyone who "hoards" for a long period of time is just plain dumb.
Recessions don't exist based on some Keynesian model (I'd love to know which one by the way, since most of Keynes' work was done in response to the great depression), and therefore it somehow transforms into reality? (Those are what? Imaginary? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions )
Yes wealth can be created and destroyed, economy is _not_ a Zero-Sum Game.
Of course, the reality is that the central banks have been creating credit for one specific reason: to transfer wealth from the poor and middle class to the bank-connected elites.
Access to credit greatly improves living conditions for who? The middle class. (And the subprimes greatly improves the living conditions of the poor) Imagine the world for the middle class was there no credit, just for the housing. You'd keep putting money aside your whole life to be able to buy a house when you're close to retirement, imagine all the value lost for yourself if you had to wait that long instead of taking a loan...
The wealthy have been hoarding money for decades?
Are you serious? Why would someone keep their money in a vault (Return = 1 - inflation) when they can make much more money by investing in risk free securities (Short Term Gov. Bonds)? Being rich is all about investing in the market (whether it's through starting a business or investing in others), please show me one "rich" man who stacks his money in a vault... If you had kept your money (lets say $100) in a "vault" the last 50 years, you'd still have $100 dollars today (please note that 100 dollars back then is worth about 2500 dollars now), if you had put these same 100 dollars in equity, you'd have 45.000 dollars now... but yeah, stack your money in a vault, that's a real good investment.
Credit is NOT tight because those who have it don't want to risk letting the middle class earn it to invest it in their own wealth-growth schemes (please notice that he somehow abandoned the idea of rich people stacking their money), but because the risk premium on the market is growing (AKA Credit Spreads), therefore the creditors lend money only to people with better profiles, and ask a greater risk premium, this is a normal consequence of a slowing economy, since the risk taken by creditors is higher.
So if you're an OSS or a closed-source developer, and you're hurting, remember for the next time another bubble grows: stay out of it.
Oh yeah because bubbles are so easy to predict... All those analysts working in banks and other investment firms are just idiots, dada21 knows better.
God you should stick to IT, you obviously know nothing about economy...
Geekcorps has partnered with Intel Emerging Markets Group in Intel's "Discover the PC" initiative focused on delivering products and technologies that are specifically designed to meet the unique needs of people in emerging markets.
http://www.geekcorps.org/partners/
Still confused?
Easy, just equip the satellites with lasers, and you just made yourself one heck of a space invaders game!!!
Now, on Geekcorps' website, of one their technology partners is listed as Intel.
Funny how you failed to mention that Geekcorp is not just a technology partner, but that Geekcorp is working with Intel to develop a
competing product.
By due diligence you mean that the reader should check if the author is not working for the competition? I mean, one of the first things I've been told when writing my thesis is to check the credibility of the authors of my sources...
Sorry to put it bluntly, your point is completely absurd, who gives criticism is completely relevant, since their position has a grand impact on how they themselves perceive events.
here's a link for yOU: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoxetine
Ron Paul wants to reinstate the Gold Standard... IMHO, anyone who can possibly want to revert to that outdated system just cannot be taken seriously...
You could argue the same thing about all fundamental research... But how much of todays practical applications would have been discovered if we hadn't sponsored research in quantum physics?
Now of course the direct link between Hubble telescope and daily applications is less obvious, but it did determine the Hubble constant (well a more accurate estimate) and determined that the expansion of the universe was accelerating... Now you can challenge the usefulness of these discoveries all you can, but I somehow believe that in the long run, understanding the physics that rule this universe will generate vastly more practical applications (and revenues) then the current (and already beaten) missile defense system...
In the long run we're all dead, but that doesn't mean we should focus solely on short term objectives (and I'm very very glad our ancestors didn't)/
That's because you have SafeSearch turned off...
Marketing is a societal process that is needed to discern consumers' wants; focusing on a product/service to those wants, and to mould the consumers towards the products/services. Marketing is fundamental to any businesses growth. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing )
Marketing *should* be about trying to find out what consumers want in order for the company to meet their needs. You know, the whole "customer driven business" thing... Of course now it's more about making the customer *believe* you're listening to his needs, rather to actually listen to them...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
And I'm not even going to bother debating the absurdity of his electricity-computer power comparison...
That architecture generates wayyyy too much heat!
When the elections are over, the winning party needs to form a government, and they do this by making a coalition with one or two other parties so they represent more than 50% of the voting people in the country. This way all major opinions should be represented in a government. A new party might not be a part of a new government, but they are able to use there representation power in the parlement, for example when new laws are discussed and voted for.
Well, I'm from Belgium as well, and our electoral system is one of the worst ones around! For these reasons:
- As a resident of Flanders, I can only vote for Flemish parties, this means that, at best, I'm only allowed to vote for a bit more then half the decisions made in this country... This means that I, being Flemish, can only vote for Flemish interests, how absurd is that?
- Up until a month ago, the 3 major tendencies (Liberals, Conservatives/Catholics/Humanists and socialists) were all in the government (either regional or national), and guess what, we will now have the same 3 tendencies (except for the Flemish socialists) in our future government! How is it exactly that the people chose if everyone is still in the government anyways?
- Whatever party you chose, you _know_ that they won't be able to fulfill what they promised us, since they will have to make a coalition and find middle solution for everything anyways...
The Belgian system in all its glory has become a particracy, where the heads of the different political parties have much more to say about who rules what then the people. Our system is probably one of the most anti-democratic systems there is around, and this had grave consequences... In Flanders up until the last elections, the biggest party was an extreme rights party (well duh, they're the only opposition), in Walloon, the French socialists have had their hands on on local and regional matters for the best part of the last and the beginning of this century, leading to corruption scandal after corruption scandal, and since they have only been thought to think for themselves, their education system is so lame language wise that most of them never even get a chance at working in the Flemish part. Our country became just two cultures stuck together round a common economic interest (Brussels), without any prospect of ever forming a true nation.
Bravo, please copy our electoral system, it's great!
oohhhhhhhhhhhh... So that's what happened in California?
Yeah and if those constants where different, the universe would be completely different and we probably wouldn't be there to describe it as a miracle... That argument is circular because there is absolutely no reason for us to assume the current laws that structure our universe are in any way better then an imaginary alternative.
One thing you also forgot to mention is that the standard model also predicts randomness. If there is randomness in the universe, it is impossible to predict the future, if it is impossible to predict the future, then in no way is it possible for a superior being to intend our existence in this universe, and therefore it is rationally impossible for us to even start thinking that we are the people "chosen" by God.
But back to the topic, it is not the role of science to make irrational assumptions such as the existence of a magical superior entity. Until something tangible brings science towards that assumption of course. It is also not the role of science to give any credit to such assumptions, since all they do is waste time (there is an infinite amount of unprovable assumptions that we can make). This attempt to reconcile faith and science is quite absurd, but it might be necessary, seeing the role the IDers/creationists are taking in the American society. If history is any indication, every time such a fundamentalist movement has gained power in any civilization (Romans, Persians, etc... ), it was followed by a steep decline in scientific progress (just think about how many Persian Nobel prizes have been awarded, when they are at the root of mathematics (the 0, decimal numbering, algebra, astronomy,... )).
In the end, most of the economy is driven by scientific progress, so it's a matter of survival for modern economies to guide their societies towards real, rigorous science.
This of course doesn't mean we should exclude religion, far from it, it just means that we should teach and put a stress on scientific methods, while leaving individuals completely free to make any assumption they want to make. As long as the merits of science are recognized by a society, this society will go forward.
XP Home Upgrade: $99
XP Home: $199
XP Pro Upgrade: $199
XP Pro: $299
No Vista: Priceless! (sorry had to add this last one)
Anyways, I guess he meant XP Pro not upgrade.
Well the University of Ghent is one of the most advanced oncology research centers... I guess what's new is not the method itself, but the fact that hospitals are starting to buy these (for operating leverage?)...