Much lower screen rez, 240x440 versus 320x480. Also, the screen isn't multitouch and I've seen many phones with a Flash UI, and they're all uniformly miserable. No app store...
Honestly, it looks more like they were trying to rip off the Storm than the iPhone.
He thinks it sounds informal and conversational, but really he just didn't want to read his typing back to himself before hitting the submit button. Or proofread, or even start with an outline and think about what he was trying to convey.
Typewriter syndrome; communication by words, when sentences are required.
I think it's been pretty clearly established that in a first-past-the-post plurality-takes-all contest, the maximum number of viable candidates is two. Have you ever seen a ballot for a US election? Communists and Constitution party candidates (and libertarians, and greens) have been on the ballot as long as I can remember, and they've never even come close to winning. It helps to consider that in the US, the Democrats and Republicans aren't actual "political parties" in the European sense, but large political coalitions that combine many political interest groups under two umbrellas. In parliamentary systems, the parties are allocated their voting power by the vote and then must do deals among each other in order to form a coalition of parties large enough to run the parliament. In the US system, the coalitions form before the vote and the vote determines which one of them receives the office.
People with power are smart. They know how to design the laws in order to Keep that power.
That's why the drafters of the US Constitution, the most powerful politicians in US history, designed an electoral system that owes more to the Holy Roman Empire than to game theory and an actual understanding of how human beings make decisions.
It's also worth considering how completely upending, in a bad way, it would have been if Barr or Ron Paul won the election in November (or if Ralph Nader had won in 2000). The will of the people would have spoken loudly, but the actual administration would have been a disaster, as the president would have been completely isolated by a congress that is utterly red/blue. All of these smaller parties need to first have a long bench of people in state offices and the federal legislature before they should consider running a president, unless they want to go down in history as the party of yahoos who ran the country into the ground (because, regardless of their candidates performance, that's how the two parties would make it go down.)
Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T
on
Obama DOJ Sides With RIAA
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Support instant runoff voting, or at least first-round/runoff voting for federal offices. Proportional representation to determine House delegations wouldn't hurt either, IMHO.
How much is it really worth to have a white laptop for instance?
Whatever you're willing to pay, modulo what Apple needs to stay in business.
Apple doesn't charge for the computer + software + "brand cool factor," that's just a rationalization MBAs come up with. They charge what people are willing to pay, period, with no regard whatsoever for what it costs them to make it. You wanna listen to music on a magic box? How much is that worth to you?
Ballmer is just trying to come up with rationalizations as to why people, objectively, find his products less valuable on an open market. If you wanna run mac OS X, it's RUINOUSLY more expensive than running windows; you gotta buy a whole friggin computer! And still Microsoft is losing share to them.
now bands can push through new albums for purchase within their own app
Now that DRM on the thick client is dead, an artist pushing content to turnkey, vendor-sealed "content devices" that download files to an inaccessible filesystem and can be killswitched from the mothership would be a new way to go, that is for sure...
I don't think there's any way given the current system to get a print job from one app to another. If you had a PDF in your emil inbox, how would you move it to your printer driver app? Copy and paste might work, but I'm pretty sure that won't work for entire attachments, pace it working in the photo browser.
In principle if you can move data from one ap to another, a printer app should be pretty easy, particularly if you wanna limit support to Generic Postscript (my machines at work have web consoles to which you can submit PDF jobs through Firefox, so I personally could be up and running very easily). But the sandboxing between the apps remains quite strict.
All I can find on the dispute is that the ACCC took action because they were concerned about monopoly behavior, and the size of eBay's marketshare figured heavily.
Given that eBay owns PayPal, I don't see how third-line forcing would apply-- third-line forcing happens when a vendor requires a purchase from a third party in order to complete a sale. There is no third part in eBay's case, and I'm not sure exactly how you would work the argument in Apple's case, given that Apple is essentially acting as an agent of sale for the individual developers, and acting as an agent selling a third party's bundled goods is legal, it's my understanding.
Bundling is also of course legal, in Aus and the US, given it isn't used by a monopoly to exploit a monopoly position.
The less specific the law is, the more control the President and his appointees have in spending the money, and to do so with less oversight. I am sure that if you showed your average senator the source code tree for your average open-source application, he'd remark "there's no excuse for 5 million lines of code! How can anyone expect to understand it! It's obviously obtuse." The problem of course is he's talking about stuff that he doesn't understand, and he doesn't realize that people in a particular reporting chain only need to read and approve of 10 pages. Senators only read the parts of bills that are in their bailiwick of responsibility, regarding their committees or their states, and if they don't like something they bring it to everyone else's attention.
This is how it works in theory, and though the system fails sometimes, making bills shorter and "easier to read" (which is just another way of saying "more mushy and less specific") wouldn't fix anything.
It sounds like a numbers station, but at that it's still not very useful.
The problem with this and DNA-rainbow is that it doesn't transform the domain of the raw base pairs into a domain of human vision (or audition) in such a way that actual higher-order patterns occur. We take long strings of tabular numbers that have no pattern at all and transform it into a beautiful curve, and this gives us insight into what the numbers may mean, what they may do in the future, etc. But this stuff adds nothing to the noisy junk it's built on... imho
How dare people who know my name enter my own personal name into a search engine and then read the results. THE INDIGNATION OF IT!
Honestly, don't post shit you don't want people to know on the internet. There's only one iluvcapra, not the one that applies for jobs and the one that gets wasted in TJ on the weekend and posts it on his myspace page. Why are you putting things you don't want people to know about you on the public. damn. internet?
As you can see by the definition in iluvcapra's response, the C standard is vague enough to make "volatile" nearly worthless.
Volatile's purpose is to tell the compiler that every time an object's name is used, the abstract machine must evaluate the name strictly and cannot replace any reference to that object with an optimization, which is why it tends to casually make statically-allocated objects capable of passing values between two co-running functions... I admit though that, aside from hacking memory-mapped IO or threading, I cannot imagine a purpose for it, unless I was a compiler developer and was trying to isolate an optimization bug. I'll bet, aside from the platforms I'm aware of, it has some purposes, but in those cases it won't be portable.
I believe the current SQL spec says that no two NULLs are supposed to be equal, but no two NULLs are supposed to be distinct, but the distinction (ha ha!) between "equality" and "indistinguishability" on many RDBMSs is not throughly worked out.
Volatile keyword often works, since this hint the compiler to always get/set the value on core instead of trying to keep it on a register where other threads couldn't see it, but by the standard, "What constitutes an access to an object that has
volatile-qualified type is implementation-defined." ( 3.5.3) and that's not guaranteed.
Aside from the lack of government expense incurred by investment activity, this would guarantee a reduction in investment in the US. Why would any foreign investor in their right mind pay almost 40% in taxes for investments?
Because it's still competitive with other G8 economies, and arguably the United States has more to offer in ROI than France or Germany.
Warren Buffet gets exactly the same federal government services as does his secretary or any other legal worker.
Anybody who makes their money by the trading of stocks is a person totally dependent on the enforcement powers of the SEC. There would be no market to trade BRK.A on without them.
In these transactions, the buyer and seller are both agents who are making transactions in fiduciary trust to the people they're managing the money for, e.g. The Investors. Those people are defrauded, because the buyer and seller have collaborated together to create an instrument that has all of the appearances of an Insurance contract, but in fact isn't.
Several banks actively didn't want tarp money, can't find the link but BofA at the time also didn't want any part of it.
The problem is that if people saw that the government was handing money out to some people but not others, they could either reasonably conclude that the funded banks were near bankruptcy, which wasn't necessarily true, or that the unfunded banks were near bankruptcy, and that the government didn't want to sink money into them.
If they lay the money into all the large ones at once, the banks can still go down, but it won't be because the gov was picking a winner. It's a sorta crappy compromise, but I suspect that was the thinking-- at the time they didn't want to give the appearance they were playing favorites.
Notice also that Davis is careful to voice support the TARP program in principle, and lauds the intentions and seems to have been onboard with initial objectives, and just attacks implementation and policy drift... which is probably understandable, because the administration who started it and the administration currently running it are very very different.
You shouldn't need super-secret proprietary Ultra Code in order to price an issue, it just requires a market and the means to discover a price. Of course, that doesn't help if you're selling the cash-stream leg of the derivative to yourself, so you need a very sophisticated process to discover how much a 3rd person would pay if you weren't self-dealing, which you might not be doing as much of if your issue was an actual item of intrinsic value, and not little more than a side bet you invented to mollify CDO investors...
Slashdot Mirror
Much lower screen rez, 240x440 versus 320x480. Also, the screen isn't multitouch and I've seen many phones with a Flash UI, and they're all uniformly miserable. No app store...
Honestly, it looks more like they were trying to rip off the Storm than the iPhone.
He thinks it sounds informal and conversational, but really he just didn't want to read his typing back to himself before hitting the submit button. Or proofread, or even start with an outline and think about what he was trying to convey.
Typewriter syndrome; communication by words, when sentences are required.
I think it's been pretty clearly established that in a first-past-the-post plurality-takes-all contest, the maximum number of viable candidates is two. Have you ever seen a ballot for a US election? Communists and Constitution party candidates (and libertarians, and greens) have been on the ballot as long as I can remember, and they've never even come close to winning. It helps to consider that in the US, the Democrats and Republicans aren't actual "political parties" in the European sense, but large political coalitions that combine many political interest groups under two umbrellas. In parliamentary systems, the parties are allocated their voting power by the vote and then must do deals among each other in order to form a coalition of parties large enough to run the parliament. In the US system, the coalitions form before the vote and the vote determines which one of them receives the office.
That's why the drafters of the US Constitution, the most powerful politicians in US history, designed an electoral system that owes more to the Holy Roman Empire than to game theory and an actual understanding of how human beings make decisions.
It's also worth considering how completely upending, in a bad way, it would have been if Barr or Ron Paul won the election in November (or if Ralph Nader had won in 2000). The will of the people would have spoken loudly, but the actual administration would have been a disaster, as the president would have been completely isolated by a congress that is utterly red/blue. All of these smaller parties need to first have a long bench of people in state offices and the federal legislature before they should consider running a president, unless they want to go down in history as the party of yahoos who ran the country into the ground (because, regardless of their candidates performance, that's how the two parties would make it go down.)
Support instant runoff voting, or at least first-round/runoff voting for federal offices. Proportional representation to determine House delegations wouldn't hurt either, IMHO.
Whatever you're willing to pay, modulo what Apple needs to stay in business.
Apple doesn't charge for the computer + software + "brand cool factor," that's just a rationalization MBAs come up with. They charge what people are willing to pay, period, with no regard whatsoever for what it costs them to make it. You wanna listen to music on a magic box? How much is that worth to you?
Ballmer is just trying to come up with rationalizations as to why people, objectively, find his products less valuable on an open market. If you wanna run mac OS X, it's RUINOUSLY more expensive than running windows; you gotta buy a whole friggin computer! And still Microsoft is losing share to them.
This is just research for his new book "Paycheck on the Edge of Whenever"
Yes, though on the other hand, I think my point was that rational economic actors almost never act out of spite :)
That's why nobody in the US bought a telephone until the 1970s.... We showed that dastardly AT&T didn't we?
Now that DRM on the thick client is dead, an artist pushing content to turnkey, vendor-sealed "content devices" that download files to an inaccessible filesystem and can be killswitched from the mothership would be a new way to go, that is for sure...
I don't think there's any way given the current system to get a print job from one app to another. If you had a PDF in your emil inbox, how would you move it to your printer driver app? Copy and paste might work, but I'm pretty sure that won't work for entire attachments, pace it working in the photo browser.
In principle if you can move data from one ap to another, a printer app should be pretty easy, particularly if you wanna limit support to Generic Postscript (my machines at work have web consoles to which you can submit PDF jobs through Firefox, so I personally could be up and running very easily). But the sandboxing between the apps remains quite strict.
All I can find on the dispute is that the ACCC took action because they were concerned about monopoly behavior, and the size of eBay's marketshare figured heavily.
Given that eBay owns PayPal, I don't see how third-line forcing would apply-- third-line forcing happens when a vendor requires a purchase from a third party in order to complete a sale. There is no third part in eBay's case, and I'm not sure exactly how you would work the argument in Apple's case, given that Apple is essentially acting as an agent of sale for the individual developers, and acting as an agent selling a third party's bundled goods is legal, it's my understanding.
Bundling is also of course legal, in Aus and the US, given it isn't used by a monopoly to exploit a monopoly position.
A 1,000 page bill is preferable to a 3 page bill.
The less specific the law is, the more control the President and his appointees have in spending the money, and to do so with less oversight. I am sure that if you showed your average senator the source code tree for your average open-source application, he'd remark "there's no excuse for 5 million lines of code! How can anyone expect to understand it! It's obviously obtuse." The problem of course is he's talking about stuff that he doesn't understand, and he doesn't realize that people in a particular reporting chain only need to read and approve of 10 pages. Senators only read the parts of bills that are in their bailiwick of responsibility, regarding their committees or their states, and if they don't like something they bring it to everyone else's attention.
This is how it works in theory, and though the system fails sometimes, making bills shorter and "easier to read" (which is just another way of saying "more mushy and less specific") wouldn't fix anything.
It sounds like a numbers station, but at that it's still not very useful.
The problem with this and DNA-rainbow is that it doesn't transform the domain of the raw base pairs into a domain of human vision (or audition) in such a way that actual higher-order patterns occur. We take long strings of tabular numbers that have no pattern at all and transform it into a beautiful curve, and this gives us insight into what the numbers may mean, what they may do in the future, etc. But this stuff adds nothing to the noisy junk it's built on... imho
How dare people who know my name enter my own personal name into a search engine and then read the results. THE INDIGNATION OF IT!
Honestly, don't post shit you don't want people to know on the internet. There's only one iluvcapra, not the one that applies for jobs and the one that gets wasted in TJ on the weekend and posts it on his myspace page. Why are you putting things you don't want people to know about you on the public. damn. internet?
Volatile's purpose is to tell the compiler that every time an object's name is used, the abstract machine must evaluate the name strictly and cannot replace any reference to that object with an optimization, which is why it tends to casually make statically-allocated objects capable of passing values between two co-running functions... I admit though that, aside from hacking memory-mapped IO or threading, I cannot imagine a purpose for it, unless I was a compiler developer and was trying to isolate an optimization bug. I'll bet, aside from the platforms I'm aware of, it has some purposes, but in those cases it won't be portable.
I believe the current SQL spec says that no two NULLs are supposed to be equal, but no two NULLs are supposed to be distinct, but the distinction (ha ha!) between "equality" and "indistinguishability" on many RDBMSs is not throughly worked out.
Volatile keyword often works, since this hint the compiler to always get/set the value on core instead of trying to keep it on a register where other threads couldn't see it, but by the standard, "What constitutes an access to an object that has volatile-qualified type is implementation-defined." ( 3.5.3) and that's not guaranteed.
Joshua...
Aside from the lack of government expense incurred by investment activity, this would guarantee a reduction in investment in the US. Why would any foreign investor in their right mind pay almost 40% in taxes for investments?
Because it's still competitive with other G8 economies, and arguably the United States has more to offer in ROI than France or Germany.
Warren Buffet gets exactly the same federal government services as does his secretary or any other legal worker.
Anybody who makes their money by the trading of stocks is a person totally dependent on the enforcement powers of the SEC. There would be no market to trade BRK.A on without them.
I find your lack of faith disturbing...
On the PRS-505, there's an excellent open source management tool for the Sony readers called Calibre.
FD. I do work for Sony, but not in Consumer Electronics.
In these transactions, the buyer and seller are both agents who are making transactions in fiduciary trust to the people they're managing the money for, e.g. The Investors. Those people are defrauded, because the buyer and seller have collaborated together to create an instrument that has all of the appearances of an Insurance contract, but in fact isn't.
Several banks actively didn't want tarp money, can't find the link but BofA at the time also didn't want any part of it.
The problem is that if people saw that the government was handing money out to some people but not others, they could either reasonably conclude that the funded banks were near bankruptcy, which wasn't necessarily true, or that the unfunded banks were near bankruptcy, and that the government didn't want to sink money into them.
If they lay the money into all the large ones at once, the banks can still go down, but it won't be because the gov was picking a winner. It's a sorta crappy compromise, but I suspect that was the thinking-- at the time they didn't want to give the appearance they were playing favorites.
Notice also that Davis is careful to voice support the TARP program in principle, and lauds the intentions and seems to have been onboard with initial objectives, and just attacks implementation and policy drift... which is probably understandable, because the administration who started it and the administration currently running it are very very different.
Also check out this movie that's been makng the rounds, very informative and makes everything quite clear.
You shouldn't need super-secret proprietary Ultra Code in order to price an issue, it just requires a market and the means to discover a price. Of course, that doesn't help if you're selling the cash-stream leg of the derivative to yourself, so you need a very sophisticated process to discover how much a 3rd person would pay if you weren't self-dealing, which you might not be doing as much of if your issue was an actual item of intrinsic value, and not little more than a side bet you invented to mollify CDO investors...
Am I getting anything wrong here?