They're all rotten. The management is looking for the most acceptable way to embezzle the shit out of the company. The shareholders just want to just put their money somewhere where it will automatically increase without any work on their part, and so they are at odds with the management. It doesn't really matter who wins, since it's messed up either way.
You can't just send the paper to random people to review. They do, at least, need to have some expertise in the subject. On the other hand, I don't think you can rely on people to accurately portray their own level of expertise. (I'm an expert on zero point energy fields and over unity devices.) So, you need some way of reviewing the reviewers. I suppose I could think of some algorithms for doing this (using some kind of impact factor), but I don't think the results would be as good as the results from a committee of humans. That said, I don't have any idea where all that money is going for a journal.
Fine. So it is mathematically possible for people to be debt-free as long as the government is deeply in debt. But since the government exists to serve the people, it's still bad. It means that the government is not able to supply the same level of services because some fraction of the money is being siphoned off to those who own the debt - primarily the rich. There is some level of self-regulation to this, because as the government borrows more money (which it has to, given how the fractional reserve is set up), the value of the dollar drops, so perhaps in principle this could be sustained. But the Fed sets the interest rate above the rate of inflation (when it should be equal), so actually the government is collecting taxes and siphoning it to the rich through the means of bank-created debt.
It's bad for banks to create money through the fractional reserve system. Money that is lent out must be paid back with interest. Now, if this interest must be paid back using the same currency (such as Federal Reserve Notes), then it doesn't take a genius to realize that there doesn't exist enough of that currency in circulation to pay back every loan plus interest. Now, conservatives will blame working class folks for being fiscally irresponsible by carrying debt, but they don't seem to realize that it's mathematically impossible for everybody to be debt free when the basic unit of currency is generated by debt.
The jihadis are without uniform and among civilians and children because you are striking them at home. If the enemy dropped bombs on the homes of soldiers in the US, would the soldiers be "hiding amongs (sic) civilians"?
Do you know a name for unconventional ununiformed militants defending their homes? Militia. Oh, but you will object to the phrase "defending their homes". Yet, from their point of view, they see drones bombing houses and killing children. Not every militant is a terrorist.
If the military of another country were to invade USA with the intention of killing a few terrorists, regular people would fight back. Well they would if their children were getting killed. Lots of Americans have guns.
We should cut the work week to a few hours. Advances in automation means that it takes less work to produce the same level of goods. Since there's a limit on how many goods we actually want to have, and a limit to our planet's ability to deal with rampant resource consumption and waste, the answer is not constant growth. We should not be harnessing every advance in automation into building more shit and filling our landfills with more trash. Constant growth is an impossibility because we are limited by the resources of the planet and not by manpower.
I used the word "maim" instead of "kill". Maybe you should read my comment next time before replying. Or maybe you shouldn't presume I didn't read your post. I don't know what kind of nonlethal trap you had in mind. A giant cage? Care to elaborate?
Slashdot Mirror
It's proportional to load^4, making it polynomial, not exponential.
They're all rotten. The management is looking for the most acceptable way to embezzle the shit out of the company. The shareholders just want to just put their money somewhere where it will automatically increase without any work on their part, and so they are at odds with the management. It doesn't really matter who wins, since it's messed up either way.
The difference is that I have accepted my place in life,
and ye shall forever be downtrodden as a result.
That's a risk that some people are willing to take.
in addition to the legs. That way, it could use wheeled transport on flat terrain and legs on rough terrain.
You can't just send the paper to random people to review. They do, at least, need to have some expertise in the subject. On the other hand, I don't think you can rely on people to accurately portray their own level of expertise. (I'm an expert on zero point energy fields and over unity devices.) So, you need some way of reviewing the reviewers. I suppose I could think of some algorithms for doing this (using some kind of impact factor), but I don't think the results would be as good as the results from a committee of humans. That said, I don't have any idea where all that money is going for a journal.
NH will just be pixelated. "This prohibition shall not apply where the image does not reveal forms identifiable as human beings or man-made objects."
TX though, ...
It's hard to be a passenger of an unmanned aircraft... unless you happen to be a woman, I guess.
Fine. So it is mathematically possible for people to be debt-free as long as the government is deeply in debt. But since the government exists to serve the people, it's still bad. It means that the government is not able to supply the same level of services because some fraction of the money is being siphoned off to those who own the debt - primarily the rich. There is some level of self-regulation to this, because as the government borrows more money (which it has to, given how the fractional reserve is set up), the value of the dollar drops, so perhaps in principle this could be sustained. But the Fed sets the interest rate above the rate of inflation (when it should be equal), so actually the government is collecting taxes and siphoning it to the rich through the means of bank-created debt.
It's bad for banks to create money through the fractional reserve system. Money that is lent out must be paid back with interest. Now, if this interest must be paid back using the same currency (such as Federal Reserve Notes), then it doesn't take a genius to realize that there doesn't exist enough of that currency in circulation to pay back every loan plus interest. Now, conservatives will blame working class folks for being fiscally irresponsible by carrying debt, but they don't seem to realize that it's mathematically impossible for everybody to be debt free when the basic unit of currency is generated by debt.
I believe the current solution is deflation. When there's less bitcoins around, you simply divide them into smaller pieces.
We could call these sacrificial drones "missiles"
That depends on how expensive they are. The pilot is probably just a small portion of the total cost of operation.
You are a fool to underestimate Iran's abilities.
We can just remove all external inputs, making it hack-proof.
The jihadis are without uniform and among civilians and children because you are striking them at home. If the enemy dropped bombs on the homes of soldiers in the US, would the soldiers be "hiding amongs (sic) civilians"?
Do you know a name for unconventional ununiformed militants defending their homes? Militia. Oh, but you will object to the phrase "defending their homes". Yet, from their point of view, they see drones bombing houses and killing children. Not every militant is a terrorist.
If the military of another country were to invade USA with the intention of killing a few terrorists, regular people would fight back. Well they would if their children were getting killed. Lots of Americans have guns.
Yeah, save that for the drones.
We should cut the work week to a few hours. Advances in automation means that it takes less work to produce the same level of goods. Since there's a limit on how many goods we actually want to have, and a limit to our planet's ability to deal with rampant resource consumption and waste, the answer is not constant growth. We should not be harnessing every advance in automation into building more shit and filling our landfills with more trash. Constant growth is an impossibility because we are limited by the resources of the planet and not by manpower.
Aren't they the ones who decide if we should be paying them?
Yeah, change the rules. That's a good one. Meanwhile, the businesses are changing the rules in favor of the business executives.
I bet being a CEO isn't as hard as being a professor.
Maybe you could, so why don't you? Because you are making much more than that, I suppose.
The 1% want you to think that $50k starting salary is great.
It's 2013. I want to hear about brain controlled computers, not eye-tracking systems. We've had that for decades.
I used the word "maim" instead of "kill". Maybe you should read my comment next time before replying. Or maybe you shouldn't presume I didn't read your post. I don't know what kind of nonlethal trap you had in mind. A giant cage? Care to elaborate?