Actually, Labor is the largest expense of the USPS not fuel.
The USPS is not an "on demand" entity. The carriers still run their routes regardless if there is a piece of mail destined for an address. Each rural mailbox and postal center collection box must be checked for outgoing mail. Every postal employee that is full time gets paid regardless of the work load.
Now what junk mail does is offset the expense that the USPS has to pay on a daily basis. The more junk mail passing through the postal system, the more revenue being generated to offset the costs.
SPAM, on the other hand, generates cost as both MONETARY such as the cost to mitigate the additional flow of email and INFRASTRUCTURE as performance suffers as some non-spam mail may get lost in the process.
Unlike SPAM, Junk mail has value in job creation. It take labor to create the paper, ink, and equipment. There are workers who generate the mailings and deliver the mailings to the postal service and (as mentioned before) keeps the postal system employed.
Corporations are legal entities, but they don't have a conscience. Many corporate boards (dare I say most) use only the law to determine if they should or shouldn't do something. If its not illegal, its fair game. Morals and ethics usually don't factor into their decisions, unless its specifically stated in their bylaws or policies.
Am I wrong?
No your not wrong, but you didn't answer the question.
Does a corporation that purports to doing no evil warrant more scrutiny than any other corporation? The premise being that they are a moral-less legal entities in sheep's clothing...
It's easier to trust a person who says they try not to sin than one who says they've never sinned. The first assertion is much more believable. The second one is probably lying.
Well unless we are talking about the devil, shouldn't "try not to do evil" be assumed?
If someone approached you in real life and said "I try NOT to do evil", wouldn't you feel a little creeped out? I mean why is he TRYING not to do evil?
Not to slam Google, but would an "evil" corporation actually admit to doing evil?
Shouldn't we take a closer look at corporations that specifically say, "we do no evil"?
Sorta like when paper companies create commercials on how earth friendly they are right before a new paper mill is built or when they are under investigation for discharging too much pollution.
In response to competition, comcast gives you a crappier product.
I see this resulting from:
(1) Consumers are using the number of channels offered as a benchmark when comparing satellite with cable. Well at least the marketing at DirectTV and DishNetwork started the "We have more channels" mantra, and the cable systems have to try to keep their customers.
(2) Television studios are packaging more of their channels to the cable/satellite distributors to force them to carry some of their less popular or new channel offerings.
(3) The old FCC rule that assigns "Must Carry" on local OTA broadcast stations, so cable must allocate channel space for them. Where I'm at, it unbelievable the number of religious broadcasters...
I think Comcast would prefer not having so many channels. They have QOS issues and they have an interest in keeping the cable bill under the pain threshold of its subscriber base. With fewer channels, Comcast could make more money at the current billing level... What you didn't think the price would go down did you??
Personally I wish the FCC would force "a la carte" pricing and allow each channel to compete for consumers. Maybe then we would see a lot less of these "filler" channels that have been created with almost no viewership.
Unfortunately we didn't. Some globalist congressmen did, most against the wishes of their constituents. Don't even get me started about the "fast-tracking" of the whole mess.
Surprising!
Isn't that what small businesses in Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, and Indonesia said when US corpororates dumped cheap material on them and flooded them out?
Umm no. They complain about the lack of good paying jobs,and living with a corrupt government (who doesn't?). They appreciate the fact that better jobs have opened up to them since the manufacturers has moved south to take advantage of the cheap labor and (thanks to NAFTA) lower trade costs to import the finish products back into the US.
How come when it affects your friends, it becomes US versus them, but when someone invisible is affected by millions, then it becomes free-trade?
Who said all my friends are within the US? Besides your question makes no sense.
And if you want laws changed, contribute to your congressman. Stop crying and act like a man.
I did and my past associates still do. This is way Canada is having (or had) trouble exporting lumber to the US. You don't really think the softwood lumber war was just a spur of the moment thing did you?
Boo hoo, poor Canada can't dump their lumber into the US below market prices. Don't cry too much, most of the lumber at Home Depot and Lowes comes from Canada.
Personally I don't think the US has done enough to stop the flow of Canadian lumber. I attended too many auctions of bankrupt lumber mills. I watched my friends one-by-one close shop and sell their businesses for pennies on the dollar. Families, who been in the business for generations, find themselves moving to the cities to find a new career.
The problem is not bots, it's crappy game design. Once your paying customers start wanting to pay in order NOT to play your game, you know your designer is a complete retard.
No the problem is the farmers. They don't actually care about the game itself. They rather farm the gold to sell to other players. It's the popularity of the game that attracts these parasites.
If only we could block china from the US servers...
Bullshit; in addition to those three you must have the ability to either: not advertise that you have the knowledge or not give out the knowledge under torture conditions.
I don't think I'm the one bullshitting (at least not the only one;) ).
If you are being tortured, then you no longer have the means to carry out what you planned. Advertising that you have the knowledge only affects the duration of your ability, not the ability itself.
[More plausible conspiracy theory] Wikileaks has succumbed to vanity and released the "leak" with the intent of staying in the limelight...[/More plausible conspiracy theory]
Seriously, it looks like we enter the age of "tabloid leaking" where we'll see more sensational leaks from Wikileaks to keep them appearing relevant and on the front page of slashdot.
Beware of the trinity : KNOWLEDGE, MEANS, and INTENT.
In order to do anything, you must have knowledge, means, and intent. There are plenty of governments with the intent on making an impression on the global political front by any means necessary including posing a nuclear threat. Some of those governments have the means to accomplish this and lack the knowledge, while others may have the knowledge but not the means.
The trick to preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons is to keep the government with the means from being able to cooperate with the governments with the knowledge, especially when they both share the same intent. This means trying to limit the flow of information, funding, and materials using any means necessary.
Writing a new Godwin's law, are you? See some information you don't like then equate it to child porn and get it banned?
Nice job of trivializing the need for secrecy by equating the information to build a nuclear weapon with child pornography.
Why should I be concerned with the cost of OS X, if I already have it?
Does the fact that Linux is free excuses the fact that there is no J2ME tools in OS X?
Should I be upset that you have to buy a Mac in order to develop for the iPhone? I mean it's obvious that you see no problem with me having to use Linux (BTW I use Linux for work. I'm just trying to make a point). Cash outlay aside, we are talking about the same thing. In order to program using technology A, you must have operating system B.
Not trying to be rude, I'm just asking some fundamental questions...
If you don't want to have to buy OS X, then don't buy an iPhone or iTouch. May I suggest a Nokia N810?
If the idea of making money using App Store and OS X appeals to you, than an investment in a Mac Mini is not that big a deal.
If you don't want to buy a Mac and still develop for the iPhone/iTouch, then I guess, as far as Apple is concerned, it sucks to be you.
Having to work outside my desired OS. Having to dedicate space for a VM running linux.
The fact that Linux is free doesn't negate my point that I can not develop J2ME in OS X as well as I can in Linux/Windows, so why should I be concerned that people running Linux/Windows have the same problems when developing for the iPhone/iTouch?
So now you know how we Mac developers feel when we are required to use Windows (or Linux) to develop J2ME (At least being able to use the simulator)...
I experienced the same thing. I had a last minute itinerary change and Continental wouldn't exchange my return ticket for the new destination. So my employer purchased a one way ticket for me at the last minute. It was the last minute one-way ticket that caused the dreaded four 'S's on my ticket, meaning I had a rough time at each of the security checkpoints.
Finally, a distinction should be drawn against the EU and "Europe", such as there is a distinction between the USA and "North America". One is a country, the other is a continent.
Maybe "Europe" is to EU as "America" is to USA?
As in "Europe" is short for "European Union" (despite the continent of the same name), and "America" is short for "United States of America" (Despite the two continents of the same name (or one if your Latin American educated)).
I don't know why the parent was modded down, well I might;).
He provided a shootout link that compared Java6 directly with Objective-C. Objective-C was faster than Java on 7 of the 10 benchmarks (the smallest margin was 1.5 and the largest being 5.7). Objective-C started 28 times faster than Java6 and in all benchmarks Object-C consumed significantly less memory than Java.
Beware of market hype. I also believe that JVM could improve its performance when it is able to profile its execution and make dynamic adjustments. The longer the thread is in operation, the greater the chance that the execution speed of a section of code at a given interval can be improved. The performance gains are more noticeable when the baseline performance of the interpreter is poor. What I find hard to believe is that these optimizations make Java faster than other languages.
The problem with marketing literature is that it makes you believe it is a panacea for what ails Java. Java has a legacy of being SLOW. JIT and adaptive optimization came about to improve Java's speed. I do believe that Java's adaptive optimization has the potential to surpass the performance of unoptimized code written in some languages. Unfortunately for Java, people do tend to write code optimized for the expected usage patterns (profiling is great isn't it). I don't see any appreciable gains (if at all) being made by adaptive optimizations when compared to properly optimized code written in other compiled languages.
The problem being that a program that starts fast and stays fast will outperform a program that started slow and eventually got up to speed. Real world usage has proven that as long as the application starts fast and remains responsive the end-user will not notice any minor difference in speed offered by other languages. This is why Python, Perl, and others are still around. The problem Java has is that it must load a huge JVM and it needs to be responsive afterwards. Java has a disadvantage when it comes to starting up, and it does OK in operation. I find Eclipse and Netbeans quite usable, but I do find Xcode, VI, Visual Studio much more responsive and "faster".
The cool thing about using JVM and its adaptive optimizations is that if you have no clues on how your application will be used by the end user (or guessed wrong), it will make the adjustments for you and make the performance the near-best possible in Java for the end user.
The main advantage that Java has is that it can pretty much run on any hardware platform without modification and without the end-user compiling source code. To my knowledge Java is the fastest environment that can make that claim. This is why I use Java for all my cross-platform needs, yet stick to C/C++ for my embedded needs. Yes C++, it works great when used properly and at the right amount.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Labor is the largest expense of the USPS not fuel.
The USPS is not an "on demand" entity. The carriers still run their routes regardless if there is a piece of mail destined for an address. Each rural mailbox and postal center collection box must be checked for outgoing mail. Every postal employee that is full time gets paid regardless of the work load.
Now what junk mail does is offset the expense that the USPS has to pay on a daily basis. The more junk mail passing through the postal system, the more revenue being generated to offset the costs.
SPAM, on the other hand, generates cost as both MONETARY such as the cost to mitigate the additional flow of email and INFRASTRUCTURE as performance suffers as some non-spam mail may get lost in the process.
Unlike SPAM, Junk mail has value in job creation. It take labor to create the paper, ink, and equipment. There are workers who generate the mailings and deliver the mailings to the postal service and (as mentioned before) keeps the postal system employed.
SPAM only benefits the spammer...
No your not wrong, but you didn't answer the question.
Does a corporation that purports to doing no evil warrant more scrutiny than any other corporation? The premise being that they are a moral-less legal entities in sheep's clothing...
Well unless we are talking about the devil, shouldn't "try not to do evil" be assumed?
If someone approached you in real life and said "I try NOT to do evil", wouldn't you feel a little creeped out? I mean why is he TRYING not to do evil?
Don't fall for Duradin's incendiary comments. He is only trying flame bait the pro-lifers.
The real issue is not reproductive freedom, but freedom of speech. Searching for database records do not directly result into an abortion.
Let me correct it for you:
In the US, it's okay to lie as long as you admit to misspeaking about it later.
Not to slam Google, but would an "evil" corporation actually admit to doing evil?
Shouldn't we take a closer look at corporations that specifically say, "we do no evil"?
Sorta like when paper companies create commercials on how earth friendly they are right before a new paper mill is built or when they are under investigation for discharging too much pollution.
It will be interesting to how this admission of gaming the auction system plays out.
Verizon could file a complaint.
-- and/or --
Google may find itself in hot water, if this admission means that Google violated any federal bidding rules...
I see this resulting from:
(1) Consumers are using the number of channels offered as a benchmark when comparing satellite with cable. Well at least the marketing at DirectTV and DishNetwork started the "We have more channels" mantra, and the cable systems have to try to keep their customers.
(2) Television studios are packaging more of their channels to the cable/satellite distributors to force them to carry some of their less popular or new channel offerings.
(3) The old FCC rule that assigns "Must Carry" on local OTA broadcast stations, so cable must allocate channel space for them. Where I'm at, it unbelievable the number of religious broadcasters...
I think Comcast would prefer not having so many channels. They have QOS issues and they have an interest in keeping the cable bill under the pain threshold of its subscriber base. With fewer channels, Comcast could make more money at the current billing level... What you didn't think the price would go down did you??
Personally I wish the FCC would force "a la carte" pricing and allow each channel to compete for consumers. Maybe then we would see a lot less of these "filler" channels that have been created with almost no viewership.
Unfortunately we didn't. Some globalist congressmen did, most against the wishes of their constituents. Don't even get me started about the "fast-tracking" of the whole mess.
Umm no. They complain about the lack of good paying jobs,and living with a corrupt government (who doesn't?). They appreciate the fact that better jobs have opened up to them since the manufacturers has moved south to take advantage of the cheap labor and (thanks to NAFTA) lower trade costs to import the finish products back into the US.
Who said all my friends are within the US? Besides your question makes no sense.
I did and my past associates still do. This is way Canada is having (or had) trouble exporting lumber to the US. You don't really think the softwood lumber war was just a spur of the moment thing did you?
Boo hoo, poor Canada can't dump their lumber into the US below market prices. Don't cry too much, most of the lumber at Home Depot and Lowes comes from Canada.
Personally I don't think the US has done enough to stop the flow of Canadian lumber. I attended too many auctions of bankrupt lumber mills. I watched my friends one-by-one close shop and sell their businesses for pennies on the dollar. Families, who been in the business for generations, find themselves moving to the cities to find a new career.
Fuck Canada
No the problem is the farmers. They don't actually care about the game itself. They rather farm the gold to sell to other players. It's the popularity of the game that attracts these parasites.
If only we could block china from the US servers...
I don't think I'm the one bullshitting (at least not the only one ;) ).
If you are being tortured, then you no longer have the means to carry out what you planned. Advertising that you have the knowledge only affects the duration of your ability, not the ability itself.
[More plausible conspiracy theory] Wikileaks has succumbed to vanity and released the "leak" with the intent of staying in the limelight...[/More plausible conspiracy theory]
Seriously, it looks like we enter the age of "tabloid leaking" where we'll see more sensational leaks from Wikileaks to keep them appearing relevant and on the front page of slashdot.
Well..
Beware of the trinity : KNOWLEDGE, MEANS, and INTENT.
In order to do anything, you must have knowledge, means, and intent. There are plenty of governments with the intent on making an impression on the global political front by any means necessary including posing a nuclear threat. Some of those governments have the means to accomplish this and lack the knowledge, while others may have the knowledge but not the means.
The trick to preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons is to keep the government with the means from being able to cooperate with the governments with the knowledge, especially when they both share the same intent. This means trying to limit the flow of information, funding, and materials using any means necessary.
Nice job of trivializing the need for secrecy by equating the information to build a nuclear weapon with child pornography.
I see an infinite loop forming...
Why should I be concerned with the cost of OS X, if I already have it?
Does the fact that Linux is free excuses the fact that there is no J2ME tools in OS X?
Should I be upset that you have to buy a Mac in order to develop for the iPhone? I mean it's obvious that you see no problem with me having to use Linux (BTW I use Linux for work. I'm just trying to make a point). Cash outlay aside, we are talking about the same thing. In order to program using technology A, you must have operating system B.
Not trying to be rude, I'm just asking some fundamental questions...
If you don't want to have to buy OS X, then don't buy an iPhone or iTouch. May I suggest a Nokia N810?
If the idea of making money using App Store and OS X appeals to you, than an investment in a Mac Mini is not that big a deal.
If you don't want to buy a Mac and still develop for the iPhone/iTouch, then I guess, as far as Apple is concerned, it sucks to be you.
You must be new here (grin).
Oh there's a cost... Nothing is free.
Having to work outside my desired OS. Having to dedicate space for a VM running linux.
The fact that Linux is free doesn't negate my point that I can not develop J2ME in OS X as well as I can in Linux/Windows, so why should I be concerned that people running Linux/Windows have the same problems when developing for the iPhone/iTouch?
So now you know how we Mac developers feel when we are required to use Windows (or Linux) to develop J2ME (At least being able to use the simulator)...
I experienced the same thing. I had a last minute itinerary change and Continental wouldn't exchange my return ticket for the new destination. So my employer purchased a one way ticket for me at the last minute. It was the last minute one-way ticket that caused the dreaded four 'S's on my ticket, meaning I had a rough time at each of the security checkpoints.
Maybe "Europe" is to EU as "America" is to USA?
As in "Europe" is short for "European Union" (despite the continent of the same name), and "America" is short for "United States of America" (Despite the two continents of the same name (or one if your Latin American educated)).
Hate to break it to you but...
Each state of the United States has its own constitution. Different ones at that. So what was your point?
A possible use for NATO in the post cold-war era???
I don't know why the parent was modded down, well I might ;).
He provided a shootout link that compared Java6 directly with Objective-C. Objective-C was faster than Java on 7 of the 10 benchmarks (the smallest margin was 1.5 and the largest being 5.7). Objective-C started 28 times faster than Java6 and in all benchmarks Object-C consumed significantly less memory than Java.
Beware of market hype. I also believe that JVM could improve its performance when it is able to profile its execution and make dynamic adjustments. The longer the thread is in operation, the greater the chance that the execution speed of a section of code at a given interval can be improved. The performance gains are more noticeable when the baseline performance of the interpreter is poor. What I find hard to believe is that these optimizations make Java faster than other languages.
The problem with marketing literature is that it makes you believe it is a panacea for what ails Java. Java has a legacy of being SLOW. JIT and adaptive optimization came about to improve Java's speed. I do believe that Java's adaptive optimization has the potential to surpass the performance of unoptimized code written in some languages. Unfortunately for Java, people do tend to write code optimized for the expected usage patterns (profiling is great isn't it). I don't see any appreciable gains (if at all) being made by adaptive optimizations when compared to properly optimized code written in other compiled languages.
The problem being that a program that starts fast and stays fast will outperform a program that started slow and eventually got up to speed. Real world usage has proven that as long as the application starts fast and remains responsive the end-user will not notice any minor difference in speed offered by other languages. This is why Python, Perl, and others are still around. The problem Java has is that it must load a huge JVM and it needs to be responsive afterwards. Java has a disadvantage when it comes to starting up, and it does OK in operation. I find Eclipse and Netbeans quite usable, but I do find Xcode, VI, Visual Studio much more responsive and "faster".
The cool thing about using JVM and its adaptive optimizations is that if you have no clues on how your application will be used by the end user (or guessed wrong), it will make the adjustments for you and make the performance the near-best possible in Java for the end user.
The main advantage that Java has is that it can pretty much run on any hardware platform without modification and without the end-user compiling source code. To my knowledge Java is the fastest environment that can make that claim. This is why I use Java for all my cross-platform needs, yet stick to C/C++ for my embedded needs. Yes C++, it works great when used properly and at the right amount.