I'd like to work for my own success, too, without having large corporations inhaling the earnings of my labor indirectly faster and faster through government buy-outs, special tax deals, tax loopholes, etc., and getting the best government (for them) that they can buy.
yes, the random terrorism (e.g., Somali pirates that took over that Ukrainian freighter a couple of weeks ago) is that. But the more organized terror groups are after power.
Hmm... there is a case right now of an organic produce farmer who sued his neighboring conventional farmer due to pesticide drift onto his organic fields, thus threatening the organicness of his enterprise. He sued, and won a $1 million award. The conventional farmer is not too happy, especially since he applied the pesticides in a legal fashion, conforming to the rules and regulations at the time, which were not in question...
It was interesting reading this in last week's Capital Press...
Not sure how I feel about this. It raises all sorts of issues, like "well, X was there before Y", etc.
But, what if you had an asthmatic child, and your neighbor, with permits and all the other blessing from the governmental authorities, had a large brush-pile fire, and the wind happened to blow the smoke at your house for several hours, and the resulting smoke caused your child to have a severe asthma reaction? Who's at fault, then?
But is it inherently different than having a tree on your property fall and damage neighbor's property... it's your tree, and your responsibility, even if the government just a month before sent out an arborist who declared the tree healthy and sound?
...unless they actually are possessing the gold they are paying for. Most people, when the "buy" gold, are in essence buying a gold-backed trading instrument. There is no real connection between the certificates they buy and any real amount of gold anywhere, much less in their pockets or safes at home.
I think you messed up parsing this key phrase: Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories.
If a bank is making a loan to person A, and person B has a similar/same risk profile, but bank won't make loan to person B, well, why?
In a free, totally agnostic market, it shouldn't matter, right? Same risk profile so both get loans with similar terms (unless bank can only make one loan...but that's not the case).
Wait... stock ownership isn't quite the same as ownership in a physical sense, there is a level of indirection there. Unless the company pays dividends on its stocks, the real money that a company generates does NOT get passed to shareholders, only the perception of value of the company. Yes, some of those perceptions are nearly in step with the fiscal performance of the company, but not always (pump-and-dump, naked short selling).
And, if I'm an "owner" in a company, could I go in with a stock certificate in hand and ask them nicely to make me my own batch of thingies that the company makes, or get a drive in the CEO's limo, or play Duke Nukem 3D on their computers, etc., because, after all, I'm an Owner, and an Owner should get to play with the things he owns, right?
But, no. We all know it doesn't really work that way.
Well...what did you do when you bought your last car but you were still under on the previous one? Either roll the difference into a new loan, short-sell, or walk away from it and eventually declare bankruptcy. Or, pay it off. Life isn't fair.
But, if you mail your house keys, you're not getting another mortgage anytime soon...
A simple, concrete example would be if one was to buy a house to "flip". You've probably gotten a mortgage for the property, and perhaps another loan if you don't have the cash, to cover any remodeling that needs to be done. Your astute market analysis indicates that in three months you should be able to net a good 20-30% after capital gains taxes on your clever investment (Thanks, Carlton Sheets!), because the market is HOT HOT HOT!, and you somehow found this diamond in the rough. But...say one of the major employers decides to close up shop in the mean time... Hmm... Now you're stuck carrying this mortgage on a property that is now worth far less than you expected, and possibly less than when you bought it...
Naturally, the bank got a Credit Default Swap on your position, aka Mortgage Insurance. But...that doesn't help you out much.
Add on several layers of aggregation above the simple example above, and, well... it becomes QED.
(Yes, I know I mangled or inappropriately applied terminology, etc. Finance pedants flame away.)
...but then some people would pronounce them as "eee-kay-ess-em-el", "eee-kay-ess-el-tee", etc. Really, they should be pronounced with the ancient greek pronunciation of X: "k". "km-el", "kslt", just like the correct pronunciation of "TeX"...
Somewhere, Microsoft's explicit statements of non-warranty of fitness and non-warranty of merchantability for its products has got to come into play here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty).
In some ways, Microsoft uses its own lack of built-in security features in its products to sell its own other products that provide said security functionality...
This lawsuit seems to be bound a bit in circular logic, and I don't think really benefits the consumer in the end at all.
Microsoft making their products (i.e., Internet Explorer) resistant to the paths some of these popups, on-line ads, etc. use^h^hexploit to install their stuff "on behalf of" the user, well...would that benefit the customer? Yeah...
The case during the trial was based on circumstantial evidence. He showed them the body of his wife only after his conviction in order to get a slightly reduced sentence.
Yes, but did you read "Cryptonomicon"? One of the plot lines in that novel was the concept of "warfare by information", and how much effort was put into hiding that the Allies had broken German and Japanese codes, by not making it operationally obvious that we knew more than we should. Granted, this was a fictional story about it, but the concept is very real. Read up on some of the more psychological aspects of playing poker, "tells", etc. (there was a good account of it about how women professional poker players are treated, and how at least the one they were following used another male player's biases against him, while being aware that she needed to lose enough to him for him to keep his biases against her so she could continue to take lots of money from him under his nose). Do you tell someone they have a "tell"? Or do you mention it in passing to throw them off their game so they spend more time worrying about whether they have a tell or not, trying to figure out their tell? What if you know you have a "tell", but figure out how to control it (didn't this happen in "Casino Royale"?)...
Woodward hinting at this could just be enough information to the bad guys along the lines of, "y'all have a tell, and we've figured it out long ago", but be enough to perturb their operations so that we actually DO figure out more what they do...
I'd take any of the alluded to spooky action-at-a-distance stuff with a grain of salt. Woodward could be as much of a pawn (or tool) as anything.
...but is it? Wire money between two accounts at two different financial institutions and see how cheap that is. Luckily there are things like PayPal that lower that level of pain, but it's still friction. Most vendors hide MasterCard and VISA transaction fees from the customer. But it's still there. RIAA/MPAA want to be like MasterCard and VISA: 3% on every transaction, or in this case, every play. It's not really about "content control", "protecting the artists", etc.
Slashdot Mirror
well...you could poke and peek sprites... a painful process...
topologically, a cow is more similar to a donut than a sphere.
I'd like to work for my own success, too, without having large corporations inhaling the earnings of my labor indirectly faster and faster through government buy-outs, special tax deals, tax loopholes, etc., and getting the best government (for them) that they can buy.
Sorry, hard to include Office 2007 in that line...
--another pissed off Office 2007 have-to-user at work.
Just as an aside...how fast to do paste special in Excel 2007? Hmm... not so easy to find in the new "easy to use" interface...
yes, the random terrorism (e.g., Somali pirates that took over that Ukrainian freighter a couple of weeks ago) is that. But the more organized terror groups are after power.
Hmm... there is a case right now of an organic produce farmer who sued his neighboring conventional farmer due to pesticide drift onto his organic fields, thus threatening the organicness of his enterprise. He sued, and won a $1 million award. The conventional farmer is not too happy, especially since he applied the pesticides in a legal fashion, conforming to the rules and regulations at the time, which were not in question...
It was interesting reading this in last week's Capital Press...
Not sure how I feel about this. It raises all sorts of issues, like "well, X was there before Y", etc.
But, what if you had an asthmatic child, and your neighbor, with permits and all the other blessing from the governmental authorities, had a large brush-pile fire, and the wind happened to blow the smoke at your house for several hours, and the resulting smoke caused your child to have a severe asthma reaction? Who's at fault, then?
But is it inherently different than having a tree on your property fall and damage neighbor's property... it's your tree, and your responsibility, even if the government just a month before sent out an arborist who declared the tree healthy and sound?
...unless they actually are possessing the gold they are paying for. Most people, when the "buy" gold, are in essence buying a gold-backed trading instrument. There is no real connection between the certificates they buy and any real amount of gold anywhere, much less in their pockets or safes at home.
I think you messed up parsing this key phrase: Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories.
If a bank is making a loan to person A, and person B has a similar/same risk profile, but bank won't make loan to person B, well, why?
In a free, totally agnostic market, it shouldn't matter, right? Same risk profile so both get loans with similar terms (unless bank can only make one loan...but that's not the case).
Wait... stock ownership isn't quite the same as ownership in a physical sense, there is a level of indirection there. Unless the company pays dividends on its stocks, the real money that a company generates does NOT get passed to shareholders, only the perception of value of the company. Yes, some of those perceptions are nearly in step with the fiscal performance of the company, but not always (pump-and-dump, naked short selling).
And, if I'm an "owner" in a company, could I go in with a stock certificate in hand and ask them nicely to make me my own batch of thingies that the company makes, or get a drive in the CEO's limo, or play Duke Nukem 3D on their computers, etc., because, after all, I'm an Owner, and an Owner should get to play with the things he owns, right?
But, no. We all know it doesn't really work that way.
One can depreciate some buildings, but one cannot depreciate real estate, you know, the land under it.
But, go ahead and try to depreciate your house on your income taxes next year, and let us know how it goes...
Well...what did you do when you bought your last car but you were still under on the previous one? Either roll the difference into a new loan, short-sell, or walk away from it and eventually declare bankruptcy. Or, pay it off. Life isn't fair.
But, if you mail your house keys, you're not getting another mortgage anytime soon...
A simple, concrete example would be if one was to buy a house to "flip". You've probably gotten a mortgage for the property, and perhaps another loan if you don't have the cash, to cover any remodeling that needs to be done. Your astute market analysis indicates that in three months you should be able to net a good 20-30% after capital gains taxes on your clever investment (Thanks, Carlton Sheets!), because the market is HOT HOT HOT!, and you somehow found this diamond in the rough. But...say one of the major employers decides to close up shop in the mean time... Hmm... Now you're stuck carrying this mortgage on a property that is now worth far less than you expected, and possibly less than when you bought it...
Naturally, the bank got a Credit Default Swap on your position, aka Mortgage Insurance. But...that doesn't help you out much.
Add on several layers of aggregation above the simple example above, and, well... it becomes QED.
(Yes, I know I mangled or inappropriately applied terminology, etc. Finance pedants flame away.)
From a long-past Slashdot sig from someone...
"It's the Turing Test in reverse. Eventually we'll be so dumb a machine can pass for a human"
...but then some people would pronounce them as "eee-kay-ess-em-el", "eee-kay-ess-el-tee", etc. Really, they should be pronounced with the ancient greek pronunciation of X: "k". "km-el", "kslt", just like the correct pronunciation of "TeX"...
Mr. Pattis, you went back to Pascal from Modula-2? So sad...
SharpDevelop, on Windows, will let you develop against Mono as well.
Somewhere, Microsoft's explicit statements of non-warranty of fitness and non-warranty of merchantability for its products has got to come into play here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty).
In some ways, Microsoft uses its own lack of built-in security features in its products to sell its own other products that provide said security functionality...
This lawsuit seems to be bound a bit in circular logic, and I don't think really benefits the consumer in the end at all.
Microsoft making their products (i.e., Internet Explorer) resistant to the paths some of these popups, on-line ads, etc. use^h^hexploit to install their stuff "on behalf of" the user, well...would that benefit the customer? Yeah...
He & family was from california, but they got lost in the woods of southern oregon taking a "shortcut" over to the coast from I-5...
but so do F# and managed C++. And so does Boo and IronPython. So what exactly is your point?
The company that developed the equation editor (MS licenses a neutered version of it for Office) does have a full-blown version available...
...unless it's Wal-Mart.
The case during the trial was based on circumstantial evidence. He showed them the body of his wife only after his conviction in order to get a slightly reduced sentence.
"Hawaiian Shirt Fridays!" is a big hit and really lets people chill and be real.
Yes, but did you read "Cryptonomicon"? One of the plot lines in that novel was the concept of "warfare by information", and how much effort was put into hiding that the Allies had broken German and Japanese codes, by not making it operationally obvious that we knew more than we should. Granted, this was a fictional story about it, but the concept is very real.
Read up on some of the more psychological aspects of playing poker, "tells", etc. (there was a good account of it about how women professional poker players are treated, and how at least the one they were following used another male player's biases against him, while being aware that she needed to lose enough to him for him to keep his biases against her so she could continue to take lots of money from him under his nose). Do you tell someone they have a "tell"? Or do you mention it in passing to throw them off their game so they spend more time worrying about whether they have a tell or not, trying to figure out their tell? What if you know you have a "tell", but figure out how to control it (didn't this happen in "Casino Royale"?)...
Woodward hinting at this could just be enough information to the bad guys along the lines of, "y'all have a tell, and we've figured it out long ago", but be enough to perturb their operations so that we actually DO figure out more what they do...
I'd take any of the alluded to spooky action-at-a-distance stuff with a grain of salt. Woodward could be as much of a pawn (or tool) as anything.
...but is it? Wire money between two accounts at two different financial institutions and see how cheap that is. Luckily there are things like PayPal that lower that level of pain, but it's still friction. Most vendors hide MasterCard and VISA transaction fees from the customer. But it's still there. RIAA/MPAA want to be like MasterCard and VISA: 3% on every transaction, or in this case, every play. It's not really about "content control", "protecting the artists", etc.