Russia has just reveresed themselves on IRAN. the new missile launch is now seen as a part of a nuiclear weapons program.
reports of isrealies being warned to build shelters..
best guess, someones going into iran...
second best guess...
the capacity has to move to russias new satellite that comes online this week, and to their other underutilized satellites that cover the region.
bottom line... THIS is the reason they are doing this... big business has spent billions listening to socialists tell them what will work... only to flush that down ths toilet.
well, here are some stats from CHI research study...
CHI Research is pleased to present to the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration the results of our study of small patenting firms. Our research examined all 1,071 U.S. firms with 15 or more patents between 1996 and 2000. We have found that:
The small firm share of U.S. patenting is similar to their share of manufacturing employment - 41%
Small firms produce more highly cited patents than large firms on average.
Small firm patents are twice as likely as large firm patents to be among the 1% most cited patents. That is, small firm patents are on average more technically important than large firm patents.
Small patenting firms produce 13-14 times more patents per employee as large patenting firms.
The small firms are younger than the large firms, but are not new startups. Persistence distinguishes these patenting small firms from innovative small firms in general. We think of these small firms the "serial innovators," a term suggested by Leigh Buchanan at Inc magazine.
Small firm patenting is very strong in health technologies and gaming, and there are a large number of small firm innovators in parts of information technology.
Small firm innovation is twice as closely linked to scientific research as large firm innovation on average, and so substantially more high-tech or leading edge.
Small firm innovation is more extensively linked to outside technology while large firms build more their own technology.
Small firm innovators are more dependent on local technology.
Small firms are effective innovators.
Small firms may well be most important to our economy as agents of change (Audretsch, 1995) signaled by the fact that the small firm contribution to innovation is most intense in new technologies.
Small firms often pursue leading-edge technical niches.
Any barriers to their participation in new technologies or exclusion from policy development concerning those technologies would be most unfortunate.
Well Falcon...
i am a small time inventor.. i am (was?) working on something with a top geneticist at a major hospital. its for genomics and its a tool that does a better job.
given this change... i wasted my life working hard, studying, spending money on materials, investing my life into the work for 33 years... bet you dont know what its likt to be that single minded.
i have ahd two ideas stolen already because i dont even make enough to be a troll...
now.. with this change.. i might as well just burn my notebooks... why bother?
i have lots of cool stuff in the portfolios.. cheap medical diagnostic equipment for the third world, new genomics things (and the phd head of a core genetics area agrees, so its not me just blowing air), software/harware for detecting snipers BEFORE they shoot, weapons detection for use in crowds (that doesnt intefere with privacy!), new systems for ranges, micro-power generators, new photonic shunts for prosthetics, i can go on.
i was a physicas major who went to Bronx High School of Science, but my family was poor...
right now after 23 years experiance i make the same as a person with three years experience..
and i have spent many years buying expensive equipment with savings and such to be able to work on my ideas... and because i am not a corporation who can write it off, but a person, i have to foot all that with my own money and dont get a tax write off for it like large companies do.
recently i purchased 5000 chips on ebay to help make a prototype... but now i just found out today that i shouldnt bother. i dont have the money to patent the idea... i spent it on developing the idea...
i am a geek, not a face... i am like wozniak, not jobs... like myrvold, not gates..
but i will say this... i am now contemplating burning all my work...
i have wasted my life working hard trying to build something of merit, only to have a socialist state take over and try to funnel things through their large centralized beuracracies.
thats whats really going on here... just go to the lemelson sight.. and they put down entreprenures, and talk about design by groups... and committees... and that a person needs to be an INTRAPRENEUR... you know.. the person that can convince a boss to give them money to make shareholders rich, while they get a plaque as a prize and nothing else.
most innovation comes from small firms... they are bought up by larger firms as they prove the tech... large firms will not take the risks... if thy were wiling to they would have worked out many of the solutions i have... but they are not... the pointy haired bosses are control freaks who cant actually do the work, they can only motivate and coordinate others to do it, and they do that often by fear of the impact to a persons life. the more socialist we become, the more like the fantasy capitalists of marx it becomes... (because those capitalists dont actually exist witthout the state helping them survive. they are large lumbering beasts who are shjort sighted, and have no ability to NOT stunt things due to their size and the kinds of personalities that tend to entrench themselves.
so with a heavy heart i have come to the realization that to work hard for the american dream was a loss since the american dream is no longer freedom, individualism, and such... the real money seems to be in selling soviet style communism (while declaring that its somethign else).. all over the system, they are crushing arts, sciences, education, etc..
art is all abstract and formless... a baby could do it, so being an artist is now a social trip... get them to like you or to get shocked by you for being offensive, and you are a big time artist... forget art like titian.. or rembrandt... thats gone...
cant have comparitive advantage in a system that now is equality of outcome, rather than equality of purpose
and like that system always finds out... the pseudo intellectuals cant actually do the work that they claim is not something special. rather than prove the point that anyone can be an artist int he morning, an enginee
We did apply the same standards of hiring both (yes, I said both, it only happened twice, and both times the girl was Asian) times and she made it. Once just scraping by (she didn't care a lot about quality and took criticism very poorly, but she did know how to program fairly well) and the other doing pretty well. I find this rather depressing. When I worked at Amazon, the only women who were ever hired as programmers were from Asia (most from India). There is some strong cultural force at work here that discourages women from becoming programmers. I wish I understand what it is that convinces US born women to not become programmers. I don't think it's a harassment issue. That's not something I've especially noticed. Though, since I'm a guy, it's possible it just passed me by.
Your wish is my command...
The main difference? They have OLD western values, in which sex was put on the back burner to let personality, intelligence, and the others come out...
Sex is an overwhelmingn selector, and when a woman has the POTENTIAL of getting something that way (abstractly or directly), she will not work so hard if there is a shortcut. The bottom line is that her greater caloric need when having kids has created a drive towards expediency and shortcut... changing the landscape is such an expediency when its compared to the amount of work that has to be done at the current level
Ever notice that they never fight for HIGHER standards in anything that they directly participate in? they may yell for higher standards of education, but as soon as you start to actually apply that, the numbers shift, and they say "no way".
The women in the west have (and I am only stating fact, not implying right or wrong other than outcome), a greater propensity for spending inordinate amounts of time on grooming, associations, and so on and so forth...
They are adverse to any discipline that would seriously cut into that in an unpredictable way (and programming problems are unpredictable and VERY frustrating). They have way too many friends that are not serious about much... as any guy will tell you, it only takes a fuck off buddy to demolish productivity as they constantly dangle temptations over you. add to that the female propensity for punishing independence from her group, and you have someone who is constantly torn between "making college the time of her life and a sexual orgy of fun" and "sitting in a room, lights low, and totally frustrated for hours trying to bang out something"
The famous feminist was right... as long as women have OTHER options, women will never excel in the ONLY options that men have... (and not permitting the men the same other options insures that they will not get distracted from that too).
As many expressed here... as long as they think that they can bail on life into the arms of a monetary knight, real or in potential... they will sit and not commit... one foot in one foot out is not the way to be competent in a hard science.
The feminists sided with the communist liberal idea (the communists said that under liberalism we would get America to be socialist and they wont know how or why - or something close to that since I don't have time to look it up), and so they sided with all that baggage and falsehood.
They are totalitarians, which is why they keep wanting to remold the world to fix problems. Their methods are to turn the house to replace a light bulb because that's easier for the woman holding the bulb... they don't look farther than that.. and so they don't see the women they damange and hurt from having the houses spin.
As long as they hold the socialist angle they will not be as effective at programming because they despise merit and hard work... not because of thoughtful consideration but because those spewing from the top know that merit damns Marxism. The useful idiots here keep fantasizing that their changes are beneficial, but overwhelmingly they are harmful. They are deluded by the end result, from the misery
yes.. you can improve memory to some genetic maximum...
talent THEN kicks in... in other words, a person with a TALENT for memory will be able to memorize more. like the woman that has the entire telephone book memorized!
however. what you miss and the researchers miss, and the socialists marxists, and gender feminists miss... is that knowing all the words in the dictionary does not enable me to write like shakespeare!!!
get it?
the authors were VERY careful to select "talents" that are ahrd to tell from extreme skills.
so while being able to think like sartre would be a talent
being able to juggle is a skill we perceive as a talent
the difference is between the circus and a noble prize!
Tabula Rasa, Marxism, and the problem of talent
on
The Expert Mind
·
· Score: 1
basically leftist thought is dominated by a premise of tablula rasa, the blank slate. this was the preferred and pushed doctrine of socialists, feminists, marxists, fascists, corporatists and more.
in order to have utopia, we must be interchangeable. none of us must be allowed to have or to believe they ahve an advantage. feminism is marxist, and the greater force pushing this side of the equation (other parts are being pushed by others). in order for feminisms premises to be true (which are socialist), we have to be the same. (note that there is no way to tell the productivity of a group of different people splitting the work 50/50 without regard to comparitive advantage, and a group of people that have NO comparative advantage)
Socialists, especially marxists and feminists have a big problem with talent and something called the natural elite. those people that rise up and such without the trainign of the state. you can find them throughout history. edison is a great example. many are born with a drive that others dont have, even if that is the only key to their talents.
so how to eradicate this? well. one way to eradicate comparitive advantage is to make eveyone pitch in and do 50% of the work. this guarantees the mean/average output.
another way to eradicate it is if everyone is actually not different. while theoretically simple, its operationally impossible, and it rests on the premise that we are not different. that everythign about us is different but the mind. the mind is exactly the same between all of us, and our differences are all due to culture, and false beliefs... like talent
both those actions mathematically doom the practitioners to the mean.
how else can you hide or remove the talented from view? well, you can have group sessions and idea management and stuff. what this does is allow a group of people to co-opt the output of the talented. so rather than joe who is the one who always has the ideas getting credit, the group that has joe gets the credit because the ideas are part of a group synthesis where eveyrone claims to be part of joes ability. group think keeps joe from being unhappy that 15 people live off his work while he lives no better for providing to them (this is why these systems eventually collapse and dont have ideas)
the west is very socialist, fascist, and corporatists. we have pushed the inane equality of outcome over the saner equality of purpose. why are you all suprised that out of this comes the next stage and that will be to kill the conept of talent and such. to remove that a person who is able to do things earlier and such is special at all. that what they do is a trick, and that everyone can do it.
under the brave new world that they are creating einstien, mozart, sun tzu, bhudda, jesus, mohommad, rembrandt, liszt, clauswitz, and others are not special!!!!!!!
if this is the case then we can tear down all the statues of great people. we can remove the differences... of course what we will also remove is the contributions that those people bring the human race.
for the truth is a bit different. most progress of the human race is from the actions of a very small percentage of people that contribute. the talented, skilled and such. those with some natural ability. natural because many of them came up and never had the schooling and such that the article claims they must have. they change the face of the domains they participate in beyond the knowledge within the discipline.
newton... ordinary... just lucky someplace we dont know about
einsein... inevitable... just lucky he was first
attila the hun.. went to a secret war school... so he wasnt so special
and when they are not so special.. then what about you?
when no individual is an individual, do we have peace, and utopia?
they havent worked out the next steps. the reason is that marxism and socialism are made up constructs that have no real natural basis. as such they have NO predictiv
It is a fallacy to think that the suicide bombers are "dim". a study of all suicide bombers in a large period showed that most were college educated and were upper middle class. not dimwitted back ally scrapers who know what their lives are worth. but idyllic college kids (many of whom are educated in the US), with a rational understanding of the cost effectiveness and kill ratio positive of such acts. in most wars and conflicts the kill ratios are not vastly assymetric. but with terrorist actions the outcomes are HUGE in kill ratio. 9/11 had a kill ratio like 15:3000, other bombings were 1:300. in a battle in a war you may throw a platoon in and end up with a few of your own dead, and maybe 20 of the enemy after a half day fire fight and would consider that an excellent return.
the key that people dont get is that war is competition without rules. technology is a tool, and cleverness wins more than gadgets. air superiority can secure a tie, but not a win. terrorism is a tactic not an ideology, and taken up whenever the forces in conflict are very asymetric.
what is there to get? certain countries are the enemies. the US is a lynch pin. even armies of equal size would not think invasion an option. so the only thing to do is economic attrition. given that the fact that we really have no old style right and you have a spectrum from left leftists to middle corporatist/fascist (considered the right), that economic attrition was already started a long time ago (see how much of gdp is from government business).
what they are doing is to eep increasing the invisable operating costs. let the costs of operations keep rising and let the ripples expand. and keep using their neo reasoning, which is out of touch with this kind of game, to force knee jerk reactions that serve the purpose. the police state type laws will hobble our ability to earn capital. the situation has created a bad internal problem with immigration. a brain drain of research candidates, and new science and engineering students are selecting outside countries. seminars are now avoiding the US. the increased gas costs and such increases the load on all products from delivery and other means like through fertilizers and such. monetary trading is under heavy scrutiny, chasing away honest business that cant be bothered with the extra expense of paranoia.
the idea is not to take out tons of people. the reason they try to do several things at once is that it cant be denied or covered up or obscured. a gas truck blowing up can be construed as an accident under investigation. but 5 gas trucks at the exact same time, cant be. as someone in this thread mentioned if terror as they describe it in the news was the point, then tons of small actions over and over would do more of that. however such acts would also waken our nationalistic and community desires to stick together and such. which is why they wait a long time before pulling another big stunt. too many too soon and the fervor that could lead to effective action gets roused. so its a case of wreaking havock and letting the junk yard dog sleep. over time the damage is cumulative. we will not be backing out the changes that we have made any time shortly. in fact, we may have passed the point of no retrun on some things and dont realize it.
the best i can do is hope that the admin wises up and listens to their analysts. their actions say that they are not doing that. that they see war as something akin to business and like business an orderly idiot can plan it and make it work. this may be true of cogs in businesses already established, but history shows that this always leads to dismal failure. we all should remember the "whiz kids" of the vietnam era. today we just have different "whiz kids". good thing we didnt have them in WWII.
This is not the problem, and so it will not be a solution
the problem in a easy nutshell is that we stopped backing individual candidates rather than parties. most people dont look at the mechanics of things to see the difference.
the advantage of giving to a party is the power of the aggregate. if the party pools resources the candidate they back can then oppose the other party that pooled resources.
what very few people understand is that by doing this we give away our vote! we do not vote with our vote, but vote with our money. we decide with our vote among those that we supported. if we support a party, then we support the decision of the aggregate, regardless of our will. if we support an individual, then the aggregate would be forced to follow that choice or forgoe participation.
its an old trick that any mother can tell you. if you tell a child that it is to eat a certain vegetable, they will hollar and hem and haw. however, if you give the child the false choice between two vegetables, they believe they were part of the consensus. in fact the act of gaining consensus today is often just this placation, rather than actual argument, debate and resolution (which are often seen as horrible affronts to harmony and peace which are more important than real consensus and value).
this whole thing that we asked for to simplefy things has left us no longer in any control of our higher government. how do we effect change when we cant effect where our choices go? a thousand dollars to the party is a vote in the party to determine your vote. in essence, we are paying for them to take our votes away for us and relieve us of that burden. the trick is not that we have no control, the trick is that we dont take the time to think and to understand what we are doing. meanwhile, this is the game WE defined, we stop doing this, then this will stop happening. pretty simple.
and do note, that if someone actually could capture the spirit of the population it would be a landslide victory... thats how many dont show up. history has presented such people when such wide open power grabs have been possible. the outcomes have not been pretty. they were even less pretty for those that were running the regimes that allowed such a gaping disconnect to happen.
we have the best government money can buy - roy rogers
if your too cynical, you wont understand it for what it means. today, everyone is too cynical on ourselves as a nation. cant really do anything if thats what attitude we have. blaming the politicians for it is not effective to changing it.
now comes all the arguments
never fails to amaze me that we all too often look like the two mules tied together that starve to death inches from food because neither one will give an inch. meanwhile, no one pays attention to the farmer that tied them together with insufficient rope and put the bales too far apart for them to eat. there is a lot more to be said for the negative space of a situation.
in the post text you read:
"scientists are finding differences in many of the current scientific 'constants'"
in the article the sentence says:
"Recent research has found evidence that the value of certain fundamental parameters, such as the speed of light or the invisible glue that holds nuclei together, may have been different in the past."
whats the use if people cant tell the difference between MAY and ARE?
there is a big difference between
"you MAY die this week"
and
"you ARE to die this week"
i know, its all relative, and i know what they meant... but you know what? thats not true. i opened this because i thought the may actually turned to an are... a possibliity realized. when i get there, its still may, and people cant even read basically.
however if you do a search you can find that the government has been funding biometrics from a distance. the ability to retinal scan your eye from 200 feet is not that big a problem. its an issue of optics and placement.
the easiest thing (and less nasty than the porn) is to embed them in advertising bill boards and such. even better maps, directions, tables, departure arrival screens, even opposite doorways as one looks through a door before entering.
there is also a large format camera that someone had out. its experimental, but it takes images that are more than 100 megs.. the idea being that if the image is large enough then you only need one small lens. then crop out what you want. such a camera, with magnifier, infrared flash, and such would easily identify people.
there are other long distance technologies that they are working on. like gait and movement tendencies as well.
and scenarios, you guys are amateurs. you make an rfid fingerprint of peoples belongings. you crack open the sidewalk under pretense of repair and put a device that when the right combination happens, it goes off. now you have the ultimate urban land mine that takes out a target and can wait for years till it goes by. if the tags are embedded in the person, that makes this whole thing much much easier.
and from an ad concept... you walkt through a park the cameras pick you up, they use identification software to pick up what your wearing. they then compare this to your purchases, and hyou get a phone message that says your sneakers are wearing out, we want you to stay with nike. then you get a message that says forget nike, you will like new balance better... as you pass stores you get messages that compete... we have new balance, we have nike...
embedded ones also makes it impossible to separate the person from a situation which makes them safer. now giving your wallet isnt good enough. so a simple wallet theft now HAS to be kidnapping with mutilation in the offing
if you dont believe this would be done, then read about nippers. these were people that use shears to clip off peoples body parts containing jewelry.
yup its a mess.
and i am still a bit peturbed as to my coworker playing games (it could have been something important as much as it could have been making a mess on a forum post).
i didnt have a chance to add all the html tags to make it clearer. i also didnt have time to compose it as well as i could have.
ah well. i keep giving people more credit than is due.
thanks for the comments.
sorry for the difficulties.
sarcasm doesnt work as well in type. i know the difference. your assumption is i dont. "today children are taught poorly" can you breath easier now? for my next trick i will split infinitives, and then put them back together!!
i didnt ad hominem you... however, the formatting happened as this forum has html formattnig and soemone hit my enter button for 'fun' as they passed my desk.
MEANWHILE...
the rest of the sentence you didnt cut out because you wanted to use such clever elocutions as fucknuckle.
sorry... but i think your wrong... you CAN do it, you CHOOSE not to.
a too wit, no wit, nitwit!!!!
you took the time to correct me to what i actually said!!!
now, who is the fucknuckle nitwit...
if i could have "edited" it after the fucknuckle in my office, i would have.
They are building vocational "workers" not people with good general skills that are "employees".
you are watching central planning in action.
they are trying to plan as to how many engineers they will need, and are trying to make them ALL THE SAME
think of the assembly line. the "workers" dont have to think, they just have to follow the operative vocational training.
what? did you think the equality thing was really just gender? its not. in a socialist state all parts are interchangeable. they are equal. therefore no one is special, and there are no class disctinctions. if smart people are more successful than dumb people that will make a class society.
all this seems inexplicable... the reason is that you cant understand how something can be naturally that bad. well, its not NATURALLY bad, its bad by design.
there is a large difference between a paleoliberal, and a neoliberal. the paleo's are the ones that were fighting the good cause, the neo liberals are socialist marxist under different names. PC speech is nothing more than proper speech of the proletariat. is speech control. hate speech is being expanded till you cant have a negative opinion of anything. that would be morally absolute, rather than morally relative.
hey... they dont teach the dead white guys, and they dont let you see that there ARE moral absolutes. a young lady does not wear a shirt celebrating that she is a slut (thats relativism at work). did you think that giving up the repressive social contract we had with each other was really a better way to go? so much for reducing transaction costs of society and keeping government from growing since you dont need to legislate laws against behaviors not practiced. many things that were not socially acceptable are now policed with guns rather than social mores. yes, the kinder gentler feminist america, where good manners is taught to you at the end of an assault weapon weilded by a man who is searchign your belongings because you had to get up in the morning to go to work.
hegelian dialectic was used to move control of school higher and higher up the ladder. combine this with the fiddling of the ford foundations, carnegie and others, and you DO have a socialist vocational school system.
parents in a community are paying a school to teach their kids. others want the government to pay for it. the majority are happy with knowing whats going on though. so you have leaders, adopters (about 20-30 percent), and the majority (who are generally opposed to the change), you also have something called a change agent. the change agents job is to link up the leaders and the adopters to put pressure on the majority to effect change. this is how you get one year old learning sex education when the vast majority dont want it.
the leaders make the position that it would be cheaper if the money was pooled and say put under taxes. lets make them a part of well say property tax.
so the community thinks this is good in that this is a good application of their tax dollars, and they dont notice that the leaders fifedom has increased. the leader wants this, its in their interests, it makes them more important. so the change agents take advantage of this by orchestrating things
now rather than have a free market business type principal and such, you get a government type (ie. not as good) person running the school. the parents seemingly get a say with the parents organizations, but the purpose of that is to split them up into special interest groups. the change agents keep maximizing the minority over the majority. its the down trodden classes vs the capatalist masses. its a class struggle.
so programs are changed from educational, to vocational. the way we teach is made more archaic. they need to claim that their programs are helping the minority group (meaning the smallest number interests). this is the same thing that gets a nation to modify every fire department in the country for a handful of women that most dont want doing the job. its not a gender issue, its an issue of who does the ruling, the majority of americans through a republic, or a minority of political elites and their change agents?
with all these games the smart kids are dumbed down, the tests are then dumbed down, and the low performers SEEM to perform better. but they are also acting out and such because there is no more concept of morals. if there are no right and wrong, there are no wrongs to right! everything is good as long as it comes from above. so while parents want their kids to wait by being sexual, the ones that have stepped in want them to be distracted by their own misery in making more "workers" for the system, that they dont actually understand whats going on.
the ones with money then send their kids to acadamies and private schools. this way their kids are not crippled like the kids they lead.
eventually catering to all these small groups against the majority inflates the monetary burden. the lack of performance and such inflates other things. the solution to the artificial crisis is alwys more money and such. never to step backwards to something that worked previously.
so now rather then a totalitarian government imposing its will by force on the public, what you have is a government making things so bad that people run to it and BEG it to take control more and more! this is how the minority force that is very much left and marxist, gets their socialist programs in. it relies on our good will to make an exception to how we rule ourselves. our forfathers knew that government has no right to aportion charity. read the words of old seneators like boone. there is a famous piece on this when congress wanted to help the people in a fire in atlanta. back then the gentlemen farmers had a good grasp of politics
the change agents job is to create a "soviet". they want "consensus". the process of consensus is not to go around the table and weigh things. the purpose is to make everyone feel a part of the pro
Which is essentially meaningless, or even worse for ignorant fools like you, a GOOD thing. Why? Because people BUY our debt. If it wasn't a good investment they wouldn't have anything to do with it.
Banks buy the debt of people and trade them in lots. a large percentage (compared to the past), go belly up, and banks go in and collect the collateral assets.
think hard about what your asserting. your assertion is that because i am a good credit risk today and they are willing to sell me rope to hang myself, i am in the best of health?
debt must be serviced. the money that goes into servicing a debt is lost unproductively if the debt was not for a productive purpose. your wrong to think that every purpose america puts its money to it gains returns. if so we would not have to keep borrowing to pay the interest on our borrowing.
to make our analogy a little better... the bank when it comes to seize my assets because of inability to pay that debt finds me sitting on a nuclear bomb.
This is why they don't forclose. The other reason is that they then lose the money they invested.
However this does not mean the well is bottomless. China is already saying enough.
Our federal spending went from balanced to astronomical in 5 years. We are spending 2.7 TRILLION a year.
And if you don't think the nuclear bomb analogy is a good one...
Then how about the fact that the US now spends more money on military than ALL OTHER COUNTRIES COMBINED!
You have taken too many Keynesian drugs... Rampant debt and inability to pay it down is not a sign of fiscal health.
Up is down
Good is bad, bad is good
Nuclear bombs are called peacemakers
Debt equals fiscal health
You are a victim of easy speak. A dumbing down till concepts are whatever they say they are, rather than what they really mean. Often they mean the opposite or expand a small truth to be encompassing.
In case you didn't realize the emperor has been propping up the economy with a few major things. A whopping 43% increase in taxes paid by us (since the wealthy were forgiven), opening up our natural resources (we don't manufacture, and so rather than re-mold our resources into products we sell a finite supply to someone else - manufacturing is the source of all wealth - forget services, you cant increase value by washing each others windows, at some point value has to be injected into the system, just as value (trash) leaves the system - converting raw materials into products creates that value), and he has put us in tons of tons of debt. In fact if it was not for these (socialist) programs dating to the thirties, the mean salary of the average American would be 107,000 dollars... not less than 35... their meddling has cost you 75% of the value of your labor and returns. (Do you think the past is a special case when doctors were willing to do more for less? No. its that people could afford to pay the doctor. Only Keynesians will think that putting a billion dollar bureaucracy between doctors and patients will save money - if they get paid, where does the money come from? oh... from the money that the doctor would get for treating the patient, and so the patient gets less treatment in exchange for having that organization. Note the organization is not on the patients side, so the patient is the one who gets milked).
Much of Keynesian economics is a pyramid scheme. It relies on someone else taking the hit later and us not understanding why we are sufferent. Hegelian dialectic then demands that we spend more money (throwing good after bad) to implement more stuff that breaks windos so we can point to inflation and say look... we have twice as many dollars than we ahd before!!!! (too bad they buy less than one tenth what they used to). Who cares if you have a billion dollars if that's the price of a stick of gum? This is the fallacious game they play, because it allows them to keep winning the bets
so what your saying is that your so dependent on computers (and you assume those entering college are too), that you cant add up a column of deposits, and a column of debits, and get them to resolve to a total?
thats what it means to balance a checkbook... add up the deposits... add up the debits... subtract debits from deposits, if they number is positive, your not screwed.
sorry... but i think your wrong... you CAN do it, you CHOOSE not to.
today kids are taught really badly due to required curriculums. a recent post to an education site pointed out that when the person asked the new math expert (this is new new new math - it came after they destroyed phonetic teaching!), they couldnt do the math problem themselves. when pressured they said the kids can learn to use calculators. now this was a person who was coming to teach the new federal math methods to teachers... if they cant understand the horrible methods and cant do a simple math problem (the task they failed was to subtract a 5 digit number from a 6 digit number - not something REALLY REALLY doctorate hard, like long division).
so you are assuming that they are getting a bad but sufficient edumakatshun...
you forget that the feminists said we are all the same. you know, tabula rasa and all that. and since we are all the same, we should all score the same in school and have the same interests across 'genders' and more. the poor administrators trying to make this true have discovered one thing that we all know, but due to PC speech control they cant say. they are not allowed to say. "im sorry mrs johnson, but your son/daughter is not smart enough to do the work, let me recommend this program and tutoring". no, everyone is a genius... so the administrators and test makers and such have taken their geas and rather than do the impossible... make the dumber kids smarter, they have done the possible. make the smarter kids as dumb as the dumb kids.
socialist type programs instilled by feminists, has tended to remove meritocracy in favor of special classes of equals. you know, more equal, like animal farm. the boys are drugged, the girls all pass so not to hurt feelings. its a total brain fart. and then we wonder why there are few here than can do standard work, and that we score number 23 or worse in education.
dont believe me, look up the information yourself. we changed the schools and such to make them socialist and task oriented. instead of creating educated people who work, we try to make workers...
by the way... when did employees the word used by capatalists, become workers, a word used by socialists? i guess when they changed their names and we stopped smelling them.
the ford foundations and carnegie foundations and more are all socialist organizations all with the purpose of reforming schools. even the younger fords left decrying that the organization is tearing apart the system that created the riches to create it in the first place.
if you were educated after the 60s and 70s - your education was abysmal, spotty, and full of relativism and such... though you will fight to the death its good.
walk out and ask some young people that if they answer 10 questions for you you will offer the group 5 dollars... (please note that they wont be able to answer the questions correctly, but they will understand law and contracts enough to play "you implied each of us" if you dont mention that the group divides the five - thats because their education is not abotu doing good and by such avoiding law, their education is to understand law so they can do what they want and not get caught - under relativism, if your not caught, no crime happened).
ask them things like who was patrick henry?
ask them things that you thought were solid groundings you had. its a lot of fun!!!
i have seen them argue that there are 55 states.
on the film clips online you can see a ton of young girls signing a petition to get rid of womans suffrage.
how bout the old study to get rid of hydrogen hydroxide and its evil twin dihydrous oxygen.
however dont forget to add the meaningf
the persian link is a crappy ass program page that causes you to reboot to get out of it.
it also requests forum pages that say i hate ni**ers...
if i lived near this person, i would make sure to turn their house gas off then back on while they were sleeping...
many people may find themselves out of a job because of this asswhipe...
who is probably happy... happy that they are a defective human being. that their lives are so small and such that the only pleasure they can get out of them is to be a worm and hurt peopel they dont know from a distance. just because you dont use plastic explosives in your bombs and that all the people you blow up arent in one room, doesnt make you a terrorist of sorts whose only goal is to hurt the masses of people that think to read you.
they trust you, and you betray that trust...
may you recieve the same amount of trust in your life as you sow...
70% of those entering college have been found not capable of balancing a check book
you dont realize that your knowledge and tech ability creates a situation that sorts the population around you. you have no idea what the average person is capable because where you are there are few average people. average to you is not average in the world.
I would solve this by making companies show that there are NO Americans at all who can do the job before getting an H1B. Also, I would love to see companies that are shipping jobs away boycotted.
thats in the statute... its ignored! before a company can hire an h1b its SUPPOSSED To find an american at any salary to fill the job. what actually happens is that they cant find an american who will do the job at the rate a temporary worker will take, and so they get the american to train their replacement. this is NOT what the h1b visa law says.
like child court, we conveniently ignore the law when it suits large concerns and business, but when its a small person, or not a 'leader' we apply the full force of a law changed to have more weight so it stops the leader, but instead crushes the small guy.
Here is what amazes me. That people can sit and say that off-shoring is natural (it is) and in the same breath think that everything connected with the issue is also natural (it isn't).
A simple lesson in very basic economics is in order. This is just to make my point complete before you read the article.
Normally in an industry there is hysterisis between things. a kind of resistance to changing movement (not always a lag unless you always flip the equation to form it that way).
So in a given year a certain amount of people enter the work force. Depending on whether there is growth or demand for them, they will collect a salary for doing their job. If demand is high, then there will not be enough of them, and the salaries will rise. If demand is low, then many will be out of work, and salaries will drop.
This is the natural order.
Off-shoring doesn't change this because off-shoring has costs involved other than salary. In many more detailed studies a lot of off-shoring (at least in the early period of the shift), is basically a null win. It shifts costs around so managers and their own can claim any reasonable gain (this is why new CEOs always restructure. If they didn't, then you could clearly measure their effect, if it all changes, you can't connect anything other than the large result. And the large result can be blamed on good management or bad times).
Off-shoring required shifts in expenditure and is not as easy as just saying we are hiring other workers. Its impact naturally would not be willy nilly and such under NORMAL circumstances.
However here is whats abnormal.
Take that simple model that I put up, and you can see that at its core off shoring is just another business choice and as such doesn't effect that model. if an employer can make more money this way, despite the added or rather different expenditures surrounding both choices, then fine, they will make that choice in the time they think is prudent.
Now take that same model, and inject 100 thousand temporary workers at artificially low salary. These workers do not have the same expenditures as resident workers, and these workers can be more easily blackmailed given their worries about sponsorship and deportation.
This is a new dynamic. Suddenly a subset of companies has an artificial competitive edge. They can acquire employees at a reduced salary and insurance base, for as long as the artificial (system short) bridge exists.
The natural effect of this is to artificially depress the salaries of those that are residential. It creates a competition between non resident temporary foreigners vs permanent resident citizenry. Given that the foreigners are temporary, they have an artificial advantage.
So what happens to our model? it plods along reacting as it should without regard to sources. The model does not care where resources come and go, only as to the hysterisis between those actions.
What would be a normal lag that would drive up salaries, thereby creating incentive for education and those committed to filling that salary, gets shorted. The salaries do no rise, and so the numbers of individuals entering higher learning for a career do not increase.
When large corporations are seen to cheat the visa program (every large firm breaks the visa law in that they do not place Americans that can do the job first. Period. That's what the requirements of the statute demands, but is not enforced. So the actual impact is even larger than what it should be given the statute)
So the market always reacts the right way given the forces injected into it. in this case, h1b visas depress salaries because they are applied to cut costs rather than to fill unfilable openings (as detailed in the statute - how many that argue this subject have actually read the statute? If you haven't shame on you for even participating, your no better than the girls that were signing to end suffrage. They haven't read or remembered the subject, and don't know what is in the subject they are commenting on, but that d
If i could direct them to do any story (for a movie), i think i would go back to BEFORE there was a federation of planets... back to the time of the wars displayed by Q... where we somehow avoided borgism in ourselves and broke away from using inhancements in battle... there are some great plots possible... you can pull what plunged them in... or you can come in with the war in crescendo and no one being able to see the end, and then show how it collapsed and makes way for the federation future...
did we get religion (turn of phrase), when we found out we werent the only ones?
if our current system is eroding into some socialist system, what happened to suddenly change it back to the founding ideals of the dead white guys?
what show really caused the demize of television and the self growth that would create a world where people put on play and such and performed for each other as they did in the age of the drawing room?
while i have to admit that the kirk and spock thing is interesting, as spock would say... however, fruit flies are also interesting, and tons of other thigns too, and interesting doesnt cut it as a large screen entertainment source that will get me to spend 30 dollars out (for the evening).
given the way they handled the corny first contact... maybe it is better they just stick to spock and kirk... there doesnt seem to be so much passion that they can hurt anything... i guess its a mixed blessing/curse
This discovery has NOTHING to do with antigravity.
if you look they spliced their own crud into the quotes from the article!!!!
move on, nothing here but a waste of time (participating in someones fantasies - never ceases to amaze me how they can look forward to fantasy and let their local reality rot. perhaps making your own life better might be a better choice than hoping for some super invention that wont improve your life in a time frame that you would be alive to enjoy it).
As an independent designer and inventor of IP i have one thing to say to your post.
thffpppththththt!!
Lets see. would I:
A) not feel like bringing a great product to market myself and reaping all the benifits, but would rather spend much less and lie in wait just in case some other person needs what i invent. this with a less than 10% usability rate on patents in and of themselves.
B) be able to patent my idea, get backing, create an american company, hire people and improve lives, and be happy making the things i make WHILE being rewarded for them in my lifetime.
of course all inventors want A. thats what you imply.
by the way, you must hate artists too. they go out, spend 200 dollars on junk and walk away with 10 million!!! i mean what would happen if everyone did that? oh, they CAN. sorry.
well everyone who takes the time can invent as well. however, it takes lots and lots of work to be able to ahve the information in place to be able to make things work. its the infinite converging on a singularity.
what your doing is in essence complaining about the inventor, rather than complaining about a system that hamstrings anyone that doesnt go through corporate america!!!
want to get the info out on your idea?
can't, you will lose your rights to whom you talk. (large corporations have legal departments and money, they will file just to reserve things later. so this isnt a problem for them, they get to get investors this way, you dont).
Want to perhaps promote your work through articles and such?
can't, it puts a clock of one year on your work. (same answer as above for corporate america).
Perhaps you would like to submit your work to a company so they can review it?
they wont look at your ideas unless they are already patented, putting a two to three year break on your ability to get out and into market (large corporations already have ip agreements and can cross share what they ahve. if you dont have a patent then you need an agreement of disclosure, which they wont sign (opens them up to lawsuits, of which, if you could afford, you wouldnt be seeking the other company!). taking a chance without the disclosure agreement gives them the idea without limitation. (this favors the large entities sitting still waiting for people to contact them, to which they dont reward them, they just take the ideas)
you just found out that a company incorporated your idea into their product after they saw it. then what do you get?
nothing. patents have to be fought on the holders dime. meanwhile the penalties are minimal, the proof is almost impossible, and the little guy has empty pockets for a 15 year several million dollar fight. so rather than pay him, they steal it. study patents, its almost the first thing you do if your a large company dealing with a small person. salivate actually comes first. also, after you win, how do you collect? you dont, they make more motions to keep the money out of your hands. hopefully for 7 years. why? because in seven years they would have earned waht they would have paid you out of interest and investing that amount, so now they can pay you in money they earned with the money they held from you. american business, you have to love it, no?
i could go on and on.
take the time to note how many great ideas were created by employees of said "great" companies. most do not get much of a reward.
what you dont realize is that you are whining on the side of the people that are cheating you!!!! i mean if it werent for those other inventors trying to make it on their own, these companies may be able to sew up the whole tech into a total monopoly that they can then charge what they want. i would whine too if i was them. i mean you spend billions on work and some small guy spending his life savings, and several years of work, comes along and figures out how to do it for a lot less money (since he didnt have any), in a better way. too bad he did it for 5 or so grand and y
Slashdot Mirror
Russia has just reveresed themselves on IRAN. the new missile launch is now seen as a part of a nuiclear weapons program. reports of isrealies being warned to build shelters.. best guess, someones going into iran... second best guess... the capacity has to move to russias new satellite that comes online this week, and to their other underutilized satellites that cover the region.
did anyone ask how did they identify them as US? was it a big tag that said "Made in USA"?
there are several states that do this... china, russia, the US... how can they tell?
bottom line... THIS is the reason they are doing this... big business has spent billions listening to socialists tell them what will work... only to flush that down ths toilet.
well, here are some stats from CHI research study...
CHI Research is pleased to present to the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration the results of our study of small patenting firms. Our research examined all 1,071 U.S. firms with 15 or more patents between 1996 and 2000. We have found that:
The small firm share of U.S. patenting is similar to their share of manufacturing employment - 41%
Small firms produce more highly cited patents than large firms on average.
Small firm patents are twice as likely as large firm patents to be among the 1% most cited patents. That is, small firm patents are on average more technically important than large firm patents.
Small patenting firms produce 13-14 times more patents per employee as large patenting firms.
The small firms are younger than the large firms, but are not new startups. Persistence distinguishes these patenting small firms from innovative small firms in general. We think of these small firms the "serial innovators," a term suggested by Leigh Buchanan at Inc magazine.
Small firm patenting is very strong in health technologies and gaming, and there are a large number of small firm innovators in parts of information technology.
Small firm innovation is twice as closely linked to scientific research as large firm innovation on average, and so substantially more high-tech or leading edge.
Small firm innovation is more extensively linked to outside technology while large firms build more their own technology.
Small firm innovators are more dependent on local technology.
Small firms are effective innovators.
Small firms may well be most important to our economy as agents of change (Audretsch, 1995) signaled by the fact that the small firm contribution to innovation is most intense in new technologies.
Small firms often pursue leading-edge technical niches.
Any barriers to their participation in new technologies or exclusion from policy development concerning those technologies would be most unfortunate.
Well Falcon... i am a small time inventor.. i am (was?) working on something with a top geneticist at a major hospital. its for genomics and its a tool that does a better job. given this change... i wasted my life working hard, studying, spending money on materials, investing my life into the work for 33 years... bet you dont know what its likt to be that single minded. i have ahd two ideas stolen already because i dont even make enough to be a troll... now.. with this change.. i might as well just burn my notebooks... why bother? i have lots of cool stuff in the portfolios.. cheap medical diagnostic equipment for the third world, new genomics things (and the phd head of a core genetics area agrees, so its not me just blowing air), software/harware for detecting snipers BEFORE they shoot, weapons detection for use in crowds (that doesnt intefere with privacy!), new systems for ranges, micro-power generators, new photonic shunts for prosthetics, i can go on. i was a physicas major who went to Bronx High School of Science, but my family was poor... right now after 23 years experiance i make the same as a person with three years experience.. and i have spent many years buying expensive equipment with savings and such to be able to work on my ideas... and because i am not a corporation who can write it off, but a person, i have to foot all that with my own money and dont get a tax write off for it like large companies do. recently i purchased 5000 chips on ebay to help make a prototype... but now i just found out today that i shouldnt bother. i dont have the money to patent the idea... i spent it on developing the idea... i am a geek, not a face... i am like wozniak, not jobs... like myrvold, not gates.. but i will say this... i am now contemplating burning all my work... i have wasted my life working hard trying to build something of merit, only to have a socialist state take over and try to funnel things through their large centralized beuracracies. thats whats really going on here... just go to the lemelson sight.. and they put down entreprenures, and talk about design by groups... and committees... and that a person needs to be an INTRAPRENEUR... you know.. the person that can convince a boss to give them money to make shareholders rich, while they get a plaque as a prize and nothing else. most innovation comes from small firms... they are bought up by larger firms as they prove the tech... large firms will not take the risks... if thy were wiling to they would have worked out many of the solutions i have... but they are not... the pointy haired bosses are control freaks who cant actually do the work, they can only motivate and coordinate others to do it, and they do that often by fear of the impact to a persons life. the more socialist we become, the more like the fantasy capitalists of marx it becomes... (because those capitalists dont actually exist witthout the state helping them survive. they are large lumbering beasts who are shjort sighted, and have no ability to NOT stunt things due to their size and the kinds of personalities that tend to entrench themselves. so with a heavy heart i have come to the realization that to work hard for the american dream was a loss since the american dream is no longer freedom, individualism, and such... the real money seems to be in selling soviet style communism (while declaring that its somethign else).. all over the system, they are crushing arts, sciences, education, etc.. art is all abstract and formless... a baby could do it, so being an artist is now a social trip... get them to like you or to get shocked by you for being offensive, and you are a big time artist... forget art like titian.. or rembrandt... thats gone... cant have comparitive advantage in a system that now is equality of outcome, rather than equality of purpose and like that system always finds out... the pseudo intellectuals cant actually do the work that they claim is not something special. rather than prove the point that anyone can be an artist int he morning, an enginee
We did apply the same standards of hiring both (yes, I said both, it only happened twice, and both times the girl was Asian) times and she made it. Once just scraping by (she didn't care a lot about quality and took criticism very poorly, but she did know how to program fairly well) and the other doing pretty well.
I find this rather depressing. When I worked at Amazon, the only women who were ever hired as programmers were from Asia (most from India). There is some strong cultural force at work here that discourages women from becoming programmers.
I wish I understand what it is that convinces US born women to not become programmers. I don't think it's a harassment issue. That's not something I've especially noticed. Though, since I'm a guy, it's possible it just passed me by.
Your wish is my command...
The main difference? They have OLD western values, in which sex was put on the back burner to let personality, intelligence, and the others come out...
Sex is an overwhelmingn selector, and when a woman has the POTENTIAL of getting something that way (abstractly or directly), she will not work so hard if there is a shortcut. The bottom line is that her greater caloric need when having kids has created a drive towards expediency and shortcut... changing the landscape is such an expediency when its compared to the amount of work that has to be done at the current level
Ever notice that they never fight for HIGHER standards in anything that they directly participate in? they may yell for higher standards of education, but as soon as you start to actually apply that, the numbers shift, and they say "no way".
The women in the west have (and I am only stating fact, not implying right or wrong other than outcome), a greater propensity for spending inordinate amounts of time on grooming, associations, and so on and so forth...
They are adverse to any discipline that would seriously cut into that in an unpredictable way (and programming problems are unpredictable and VERY frustrating). They have way too many friends that are not serious about much... as any guy will tell you, it only takes a fuck off buddy to demolish productivity as they constantly dangle temptations over you. add to that the female propensity for punishing independence from her group, and you have someone who is constantly torn between "making college the time of her life and a sexual orgy of fun" and "sitting in a room, lights low, and totally frustrated for hours trying to bang out something"
The famous feminist was right... as long as women have OTHER options, women will never excel in the ONLY options that men have... (and not permitting the men the same other options insures that they will not get distracted from that too).
As many expressed here... as long as they think that they can bail on life into the arms of a monetary knight, real or in potential... they will sit and not commit... one foot in one foot out is not the way to be competent in a hard science.
The feminists sided with the communist liberal idea (the communists said that under liberalism we would get America to be socialist and they wont know how or why - or something close to that since I don't have time to look it up), and so they sided with all that baggage and falsehood.
They are totalitarians, which is why they keep wanting to remold the world to fix problems. Their methods are to turn the house to replace a light bulb because that's easier for the woman holding the bulb... they don't look farther than that.. and so they don't see the women they damange and hurt from having the houses spin.
As long as they hold the socialist angle they will not be as effective at programming because they despise merit and hard work... not because of thoughtful consideration but because those spewing from the top know that merit damns Marxism. The useful idiots here keep fantasizing that their changes are beneficial, but overwhelmingly they are harmful. They are deluded by the end result, from the misery
yes.. you can improve memory to some genetic maximum...
talent THEN kicks in... in other words, a person with a TALENT for memory will be able to memorize more. like the woman that has the entire telephone book memorized!
however. what you miss and the researchers miss, and the socialists marxists, and gender feminists miss... is that knowing all the words in the dictionary does not enable me to write like shakespeare!!!
get it?
the authors were VERY careful to select "talents" that are ahrd to tell from extreme skills.
so while being able to think like sartre would be a talent
being able to juggle is a skill we perceive as a talent
the difference is between the circus and a noble prize!
basically leftist thought is dominated by a premise of tablula rasa, the blank slate. this was the preferred and pushed doctrine of socialists, feminists, marxists, fascists, corporatists and more.
in order to have utopia, we must be interchangeable. none of us must be allowed to have or to believe they ahve an advantage. feminism is marxist, and the greater force pushing this side of the equation (other parts are being pushed by others). in order for feminisms premises to be true (which are socialist), we have to be the same. (note that there is no way to tell the productivity of a group of different people splitting the work 50/50 without regard to comparitive advantage, and a group of people that have NO comparative advantage)
Socialists, especially marxists and feminists have a big problem with talent and something called the natural elite. those people that rise up and such without the trainign of the state. you can find them throughout history. edison is a great example. many are born with a drive that others dont have, even if that is the only key to their talents.
so how to eradicate this? well. one way to eradicate comparitive advantage is to make eveyone pitch in and do 50% of the work. this guarantees the mean/average output.
another way to eradicate it is if everyone is actually not different. while theoretically simple, its operationally impossible, and it rests on the premise that we are not different. that everythign about us is different but the mind. the mind is exactly the same between all of us, and our differences are all due to culture, and false beliefs... like talent
both those actions mathematically doom the practitioners to the mean.
how else can you hide or remove the talented from view? well, you can have group sessions and idea management and stuff. what this does is allow a group of people to co-opt the output of the talented. so rather than joe who is the one who always has the ideas getting credit, the group that has joe gets the credit because the ideas are part of a group synthesis where eveyrone claims to be part of joes ability. group think keeps joe from being unhappy that 15 people live off his work while he lives no better for providing to them (this is why these systems eventually collapse and dont have ideas)
the west is very socialist, fascist, and corporatists. we have pushed the inane equality of outcome over the saner equality of purpose. why are you all suprised that out of this comes the next stage and that will be to kill the conept of talent and such. to remove that a person who is able to do things earlier and such is special at all. that what they do is a trick, and that everyone can do it.
under the brave new world that they are creating einstien, mozart, sun tzu, bhudda, jesus, mohommad, rembrandt, liszt, clauswitz, and others are not special!!!!!!!
if this is the case then we can tear down all the statues of great people. we can remove the differences... of course what we will also remove is the contributions that those people bring the human race.
for the truth is a bit different. most progress of the human race is from the actions of a very small percentage of people that contribute. the talented, skilled and such. those with some natural ability. natural because many of them came up and never had the schooling and such that the article claims they must have. they change the face of the domains they participate in beyond the knowledge within the discipline.
newton... ordinary... just lucky someplace we dont know about einsein... inevitable... just lucky he was first attila the hun.. went to a secret war school... so he wasnt so special
and when they are not so special.. then what about you?
when no individual is an individual, do we have peace, and utopia?
they havent worked out the next steps. the reason is that marxism and socialism are made up constructs that have no real natural basis. as such they have NO predictiv
It is a fallacy to think that the suicide bombers are "dim". a study of all suicide bombers in a large period showed that most were college educated and were upper middle class. not dimwitted back ally scrapers who know what their lives are worth. but idyllic college kids (many of whom are educated in the US), with a rational understanding of the cost effectiveness and kill ratio positive of such acts. in most wars and conflicts the kill ratios are not vastly assymetric. but with terrorist actions the outcomes are HUGE in kill ratio. 9/11 had a kill ratio like 15:3000, other bombings were 1:300. in a battle in a war you may throw a platoon in and end up with a few of your own dead, and maybe 20 of the enemy after a half day fire fight and would consider that an excellent return.
the key that people dont get is that war is competition without rules. technology is a tool, and cleverness wins more than gadgets. air superiority can secure a tie, but not a win. terrorism is a tactic not an ideology, and taken up whenever the forces in conflict are very asymetric.
what is there to get? certain countries are the enemies. the US is a lynch pin. even armies of equal size would not think invasion an option. so the only thing to do is economic attrition. given that the fact that we really have no old style right and you have a spectrum from left leftists to middle corporatist/fascist (considered the right), that economic attrition was already started a long time ago (see how much of gdp is from government business).
what they are doing is to eep increasing the invisable operating costs. let the costs of operations keep rising and let the ripples expand. and keep using their neo reasoning, which is out of touch with this kind of game, to force knee jerk reactions that serve the purpose. the police state type laws will hobble our ability to earn capital. the situation has created a bad internal problem with immigration. a brain drain of research candidates, and new science and engineering students are selecting outside countries. seminars are now avoiding the US. the increased gas costs and such increases the load on all products from delivery and other means like through fertilizers and such. monetary trading is under heavy scrutiny, chasing away honest business that cant be bothered with the extra expense of paranoia.
the idea is not to take out tons of people. the reason they try to do several things at once is that it cant be denied or covered up or obscured. a gas truck blowing up can be construed as an accident under investigation. but 5 gas trucks at the exact same time, cant be. as someone in this thread mentioned if terror as they describe it in the news was the point, then tons of small actions over and over would do more of that. however such acts would also waken our nationalistic and community desires to stick together and such. which is why they wait a long time before pulling another big stunt. too many too soon and the fervor that could lead to effective action gets roused. so its a case of wreaking havock and letting the junk yard dog sleep. over time the damage is cumulative. we will not be backing out the changes that we have made any time shortly. in fact, we may have passed the point of no retrun on some things and dont realize it.
the best i can do is hope that the admin wises up and listens to their analysts. their actions say that they are not doing that. that they see war as something akin to business and like business an orderly idiot can plan it and make it work. this may be true of cogs in businesses already established, but history shows that this always leads to dismal failure. we all should remember the "whiz kids" of the vietnam era. today we just have different "whiz kids". good thing we didnt have them in WWII.
This is not the problem, and so it will not be a solution
the problem in a easy nutshell is that we stopped backing individual candidates rather than parties. most people dont look at the mechanics of things to see the difference.
the advantage of giving to a party is the power of the aggregate. if the party pools resources the candidate they back can then oppose the other party that pooled resources.
what very few people understand is that by doing this we give away our vote! we do not vote with our vote, but vote with our money. we decide with our vote among those that we supported. if we support a party, then we support the decision of the aggregate, regardless of our will. if we support an individual, then the aggregate would be forced to follow that choice or forgoe participation.
its an old trick that any mother can tell you. if you tell a child that it is to eat a certain vegetable, they will hollar and hem and haw. however, if you give the child the false choice between two vegetables, they believe they were part of the consensus. in fact the act of gaining consensus today is often just this placation, rather than actual argument, debate and resolution (which are often seen as horrible affronts to harmony and peace which are more important than real consensus and value).
this whole thing that we asked for to simplefy things has left us no longer in any control of our higher government. how do we effect change when we cant effect where our choices go? a thousand dollars to the party is a vote in the party to determine your vote. in essence, we are paying for them to take our votes away for us and relieve us of that burden. the trick is not that we have no control, the trick is that we dont take the time to think and to understand what we are doing. meanwhile, this is the game WE defined, we stop doing this, then this will stop happening. pretty simple.
and do note, that if someone actually could capture the spirit of the population it would be a landslide victory... thats how many dont show up. history has presented such people when such wide open power grabs have been possible. the outcomes have not been pretty. they were even less pretty for those that were running the regimes that allowed such a gaping disconnect to happen.
we have the best government money can buy - roy rogers
if your too cynical, you wont understand it for what it means. today, everyone is too cynical on ourselves as a nation. cant really do anything if thats what attitude we have. blaming the politicians for it is not effective to changing it.
now comes all the arguments
never fails to amaze me that we all too often look like the two mules tied together that starve to death inches from food because neither one will give an inch. meanwhile, no one pays attention to the farmer that tied them together with insufficient rope and put the bales too far apart for them to eat. there is a lot more to be said for the negative space of a situation.
in the post text you read:
"scientists are finding differences in many of the current scientific 'constants'"
in the article the sentence says:
"Recent research has found evidence that the value of certain fundamental parameters, such as the speed of light or the invisible glue that holds nuclei together, may have been different in the past."
whats the use if people cant tell the difference between MAY and ARE?
there is a big difference between "you MAY die this week" and "you ARE to die this week"
i know, its all relative, and i know what they meant... but you know what? thats not true. i opened this because i thought the may actually turned to an are... a possibliity realized. when i get there, its still may, and people cant even read basically.
that was funny....
it was a clever way to say "work the wetware"
however if you do a search you can find that the government has been funding biometrics from a distance. the ability to retinal scan your eye from 200 feet is not that big a problem. its an issue of optics and placement.
the easiest thing (and less nasty than the porn) is to embed them in advertising bill boards and such. even better maps, directions, tables, departure arrival screens, even opposite doorways as one looks through a door before entering.
there is also a large format camera that someone had out. its experimental, but it takes images that are more than 100 megs.. the idea being that if the image is large enough then you only need one small lens. then crop out what you want. such a camera, with magnifier, infrared flash, and such would easily identify people.
there are other long distance technologies that they are working on. like gait and movement tendencies as well.
and scenarios, you guys are amateurs. you make an rfid fingerprint of peoples belongings. you crack open the sidewalk under pretense of repair and put a device that when the right combination happens, it goes off. now you have the ultimate urban land mine that takes out a target and can wait for years till it goes by. if the tags are embedded in the person, that makes this whole thing much much easier.
and from an ad concept... you walkt through a park the cameras pick you up, they use identification software to pick up what your wearing. they then compare this to your purchases, and hyou get a phone message that says your sneakers are wearing out, we want you to stay with nike. then you get a message that says forget nike, you will like new balance better... as you pass stores you get messages that compete... we have new balance, we have nike...
embedded ones also makes it impossible to separate the person from a situation which makes them safer. now giving your wallet isnt good enough. so a simple wallet theft now HAS to be kidnapping with mutilation in the offing
if you dont believe this would be done, then read about nippers. these were people that use shears to clip off peoples body parts containing jewelry.
yup its a mess.
and i am still a bit peturbed as to my coworker playing games (it could have been something important as much as it could have been making a mess on a forum post).
i didnt have a chance to add all the html tags to make it clearer. i also didnt have time to compose it as well as i could have.
ah well. i keep giving people more credit than is due.
thanks for the comments. sorry for the difficulties.
sarcasm doesnt work as well in type. i know the difference. your assumption is i dont. "today children are taught poorly" can you breath easier now? for my next trick i will split infinitives, and then put them back together!!
they are NOT capable...
i didnt ad hominem you... however, the formatting happened as this forum has html formattnig and soemone hit my enter button for 'fun' as they passed my desk.
MEANWHILE...
the rest of the sentence you didnt cut out because you wanted to use such clever elocutions as fucknuckle. sorry... but i think your wrong... you CAN do it, you CHOOSE not to.
a too wit, no wit, nitwit!!!!
you took the time to correct me to what i actually said!!! now, who is the fucknuckle nitwit...
if i could have "edited" it after the fucknuckle in my office, i would have.
you are watching central planning in action. they are trying to plan as to how many engineers they will need, and are trying to make them ALL THE SAME
think of the assembly line. the "workers" dont have to think, they just have to follow the operative vocational training.
what? did you think the equality thing was really just gender? its not. in a socialist state all parts are interchangeable. they are equal. therefore no one is special, and there are no class disctinctions. if smart people are more successful than dumb people that will make a class society.
all this seems inexplicable... the reason is that you cant understand how something can be naturally that bad. well, its not NATURALLY bad, its bad by design.
there is a large difference between a paleoliberal, and a neoliberal. the paleo's are the ones that were fighting the good cause, the neo liberals are socialist marxist under different names. PC speech is nothing more than proper speech of the proletariat. is speech control. hate speech is being expanded till you cant have a negative opinion of anything. that would be morally absolute, rather than morally relative.
hey... they dont teach the dead white guys, and they dont let you see that there ARE moral absolutes. a young lady does not wear a shirt celebrating that she is a slut (thats relativism at work). did you think that giving up the repressive social contract we had with each other was really a better way to go? so much for reducing transaction costs of society and keeping government from growing since you dont need to legislate laws against behaviors not practiced. many things that were not socially acceptable are now policed with guns rather than social mores. yes, the kinder gentler feminist america, where good manners is taught to you at the end of an assault weapon weilded by a man who is searchign your belongings because you had to get up in the morning to go to work.
yup... thats amerika.
hegelian dialectic was used to move control of school higher and higher up the ladder. combine this with the fiddling of the ford foundations, carnegie and others, and you DO have a socialist vocational school system.
parents in a community are paying a school to teach their kids. others want the government to pay for it. the majority are happy with knowing whats going on though. so you have leaders, adopters (about 20-30 percent), and the majority (who are generally opposed to the change), you also have something called a change agent. the change agents job is to link up the leaders and the adopters to put pressure on the majority to effect change. this is how you get one year old learning sex education when the vast majority dont want it.
the leaders make the position that it would be cheaper if the money was pooled and say put under taxes. lets make them a part of well say property tax.
so the community thinks this is good in that this is a good application of their tax dollars, and they dont notice that the leaders fifedom has increased. the leader wants this, its in their interests, it makes them more important. so the change agents take advantage of this by orchestrating things
now rather than have a free market business type principal and such, you get a government type (ie. not as good) person running the school. the parents seemingly get a say with the parents organizations, but the purpose of that is to split them up into special interest groups. the change agents keep maximizing the minority over the majority. its the down trodden classes vs the capatalist masses. its a class struggle.
so programs are changed from educational, to vocational. the way we teach is made more archaic. they need to claim that their programs are helping the minority group (meaning the smallest number interests). this is the same thing that gets a nation to modify every fire department in the country for a handful of women that most dont want doing the job. its not a gender issue, its an issue of who does the ruling, the majority of americans through a republic, or a minority of political elites and their change agents?
with all these games the smart kids are dumbed down, the tests are then dumbed down, and the low performers SEEM to perform better. but they are also acting out and such because there is no more concept of morals. if there are no right and wrong, there are no wrongs to right! everything is good as long as it comes from above. so while parents want their kids to wait by being sexual, the ones that have stepped in want them to be distracted by their own misery in making more "workers" for the system, that they dont actually understand whats going on.
the ones with money then send their kids to acadamies and private schools. this way their kids are not crippled like the kids they lead.
eventually catering to all these small groups against the majority inflates the monetary burden. the lack of performance and such inflates other things. the solution to the artificial crisis is alwys more money and such. never to step backwards to something that worked previously.
so now rather then a totalitarian government imposing its will by force on the public, what you have is a government making things so bad that people run to it and BEG it to take control more and more!
this is how the minority force that is very much left and marxist, gets their socialist programs in. it relies on our good will to make an exception to how we rule ourselves. our forfathers knew that government has no right to aportion charity. read the words of old seneators like boone. there is a famous piece on this when congress wanted to help the people in a fire in atlanta. back then the gentlemen farmers had a good grasp of politics
the change agents job is to create a "soviet". they want "consensus". the process of consensus is not to go around the table and weigh things. the purpose is to make everyone feel a part of the pro
Which is essentially meaningless, or even worse for ignorant fools like you, a GOOD thing. Why? Because people BUY our debt. If it wasn't a good investment they wouldn't have anything to do with it.
Banks buy the debt of people and trade them in lots. a large percentage (compared to the past), go belly up, and banks go in and collect the collateral assets.
think hard about what your asserting. your assertion is that because i am a good credit risk today and they are willing to sell me rope to hang myself, i am in the best of health?
debt must be serviced. the money that goes into servicing a debt is lost unproductively if the debt was not for a productive purpose. your wrong to think that every purpose america puts its money to it gains returns. if so we would not have to keep borrowing to pay the interest on our borrowing.
to make our analogy a little better... the bank when it comes to seize my assets because of inability to pay that debt finds me sitting on a nuclear bomb.
This is why they don't forclose. The other reason is that they then lose the money they invested.
However this does not mean the well is bottomless. China is already saying enough.
Our federal spending went from balanced to astronomical in 5 years. We are spending 2.7 TRILLION a year.
And if you don't think the nuclear bomb analogy is a good one...
Then how about the fact that the US now spends more money on military than ALL OTHER COUNTRIES COMBINED!
You have taken too many Keynesian drugs... Rampant debt and inability to pay it down is not a sign of fiscal health.
Up is down
Good is bad, bad is good
Nuclear bombs are called peacemakers
Debt equals fiscal health
You are a victim of easy speak. A dumbing down till concepts are whatever they say they are, rather than what they really mean. Often they mean the opposite or expand a small truth to be encompassing.
In case you didn't realize the emperor has been propping up the economy with a few major things. A whopping 43% increase in taxes paid by us (since the wealthy were forgiven), opening up our natural resources (we don't manufacture, and so rather than re-mold our resources into products we sell a finite supply to someone else - manufacturing is the source of all wealth - forget services, you cant increase value by washing each others windows, at some point value has to be injected into the system, just as value (trash) leaves the system - converting raw materials into products creates that value), and he has put us in tons of tons of debt. In fact if it was not for these (socialist) programs dating to the thirties, the mean salary of the average American would be 107,000 dollars... not less than 35... their meddling has cost you 75% of the value of your labor and returns. (Do you think the past is a special case when doctors were willing to do more for less? No. its that people could afford to pay the doctor. Only Keynesians will think that putting a billion dollar bureaucracy between doctors and patients will save money - if they get paid, where does the money come from? oh... from the money that the doctor would get for treating the patient, and so the patient gets less treatment in exchange for having that organization. Note the organization is not on the patients side, so the patient is the one who gets milked).
Much of Keynesian economics is a pyramid scheme. It relies on someone else taking the hit later and us not understanding why we are sufferent. Hegelian dialectic then demands that we spend more money (throwing good after bad) to implement more stuff that breaks windos so we can point to inflation and say look... we have twice as many dollars than we ahd before!!!! (too bad they buy less than one tenth what they used to). Who cares if you have a billion dollars if that's the price of a stick of gum? This is the fallacious game they play, because it allows them to keep winning the bets
so what your saying is that your so dependent on computers (and you assume those entering college are too), that you cant add up a column of deposits, and a column of debits, and get them to resolve to a total? thats what it means to balance a checkbook... add up the deposits... add up the debits... subtract debits from deposits, if they number is positive, your not screwed. sorry... but i think your wrong... you CAN do it, you CHOOSE not to. today kids are taught really badly due to required curriculums. a recent post to an education site pointed out that when the person asked the new math expert (this is new new new math - it came after they destroyed phonetic teaching!), they couldnt do the math problem themselves. when pressured they said the kids can learn to use calculators. now this was a person who was coming to teach the new federal math methods to teachers... if they cant understand the horrible methods and cant do a simple math problem (the task they failed was to subtract a 5 digit number from a 6 digit number - not something REALLY REALLY doctorate hard, like long division). so you are assuming that they are getting a bad but sufficient edumakatshun... you forget that the feminists said we are all the same. you know, tabula rasa and all that. and since we are all the same, we should all score the same in school and have the same interests across 'genders' and more. the poor administrators trying to make this true have discovered one thing that we all know, but due to PC speech control they cant say. they are not allowed to say. "im sorry mrs johnson, but your son/daughter is not smart enough to do the work, let me recommend this program and tutoring". no, everyone is a genius... so the administrators and test makers and such have taken their geas and rather than do the impossible... make the dumber kids smarter, they have done the possible. make the smarter kids as dumb as the dumb kids. socialist type programs instilled by feminists, has tended to remove meritocracy in favor of special classes of equals. you know, more equal, like animal farm. the boys are drugged, the girls all pass so not to hurt feelings. its a total brain fart. and then we wonder why there are few here than can do standard work, and that we score number 23 or worse in education. dont believe me, look up the information yourself. we changed the schools and such to make them socialist and task oriented. instead of creating educated people who work, we try to make workers... by the way... when did employees the word used by capatalists, become workers, a word used by socialists? i guess when they changed their names and we stopped smelling them. the ford foundations and carnegie foundations and more are all socialist organizations all with the purpose of reforming schools. even the younger fords left decrying that the organization is tearing apart the system that created the riches to create it in the first place. if you were educated after the 60s and 70s - your education was abysmal, spotty, and full of relativism and such... though you will fight to the death its good. walk out and ask some young people that if they answer 10 questions for you you will offer the group 5 dollars... (please note that they wont be able to answer the questions correctly, but they will understand law and contracts enough to play "you implied each of us" if you dont mention that the group divides the five - thats because their education is not abotu doing good and by such avoiding law, their education is to understand law so they can do what they want and not get caught - under relativism, if your not caught, no crime happened). ask them things like who was patrick henry? ask them things that you thought were solid groundings you had. its a lot of fun!!! i have seen them argue that there are 55 states. on the film clips online you can see a ton of young girls signing a petition to get rid of womans suffrage. how bout the old study to get rid of hydrogen hydroxide and its evil twin dihydrous oxygen. however dont forget to add the meaningf
the persian link is a crappy ass program page that causes you to reboot to get out of it. it also requests forum pages that say i hate ni**ers... if i lived near this person, i would make sure to turn their house gas off then back on while they were sleeping... many people may find themselves out of a job because of this asswhipe... who is probably happy... happy that they are a defective human being. that their lives are so small and such that the only pleasure they can get out of them is to be a worm and hurt peopel they dont know from a distance. just because you dont use plastic explosives in your bombs and that all the people you blow up arent in one room, doesnt make you a terrorist of sorts whose only goal is to hurt the masses of people that think to read you. they trust you, and you betray that trust... may you recieve the same amount of trust in your life as you sow...
70% of those entering college have been found not capable of balancing a check book
you dont realize that your knowledge and tech ability creates a situation that sorts the population around you. you have no idea what the average person is capable because where you are there are few average people. average to you is not average in the world.
I would solve this by making companies show that there are NO Americans at all who can do the job before getting an H1B. Also, I would love to see companies that are shipping jobs away boycotted. thats in the statute... its ignored! before a company can hire an h1b its SUPPOSSED To find an american at any salary to fill the job. what actually happens is that they cant find an american who will do the job at the rate a temporary worker will take, and so they get the american to train their replacement. this is NOT what the h1b visa law says.
like child court, we conveniently ignore the law when it suits large concerns and business, but when its a small person, or not a 'leader' we apply the full force of a law changed to have more weight so it stops the leader, but instead crushes the small guy.
Here is what amazes me. That people can sit and say that off-shoring is natural (it is) and in the same breath think that everything connected with the issue is also natural (it isn't).
A simple lesson in very basic economics is in order. This is just to make my point complete before you read the article.
Normally in an industry there is hysterisis between things. a kind of resistance to changing movement (not always a lag unless you always flip the equation to form it that way).
So in a given year a certain amount of people enter the work force. Depending on whether there is growth or demand for them, they will collect a salary for doing their job. If demand is high, then there will not be enough of them, and the salaries will rise. If demand is low, then many will be out of work, and salaries will drop.
This is the natural order.
Off-shoring doesn't change this because off-shoring has costs involved other than salary. In many more detailed studies a lot of off-shoring (at least in the early period of the shift), is basically a null win. It shifts costs around so managers and their own can claim any reasonable gain (this is why new CEOs always restructure. If they didn't, then you could clearly measure their effect, if it all changes, you can't connect anything other than the large result. And the large result can be blamed on good management or bad times).
Off-shoring required shifts in expenditure and is not as easy as just saying we are hiring other workers. Its impact naturally would not be willy nilly and such under NORMAL circumstances.
However here is whats abnormal.
Take that simple model that I put up, and you can see that at its core off shoring is just another business choice and as such doesn't effect that model. if an employer can make more money this way, despite the added or rather different expenditures surrounding both choices, then fine, they will make that choice in the time they think is prudent.
Now take that same model, and inject 100 thousand temporary workers at artificially low salary. These workers do not have the same expenditures as resident workers, and these workers can be more easily blackmailed given their worries about sponsorship and deportation.
This is a new dynamic. Suddenly a subset of companies has an artificial competitive edge. They can acquire employees at a reduced salary and insurance base, for as long as the artificial (system short) bridge exists.
The natural effect of this is to artificially depress the salaries of those that are residential. It creates a competition between non resident temporary foreigners vs permanent resident citizenry. Given that the foreigners are temporary, they have an artificial advantage.
So what happens to our model? it plods along reacting as it should without regard to sources. The model does not care where resources come and go, only as to the hysterisis between those actions.
What would be a normal lag that would drive up salaries, thereby creating incentive for education and those committed to filling that salary, gets shorted. The salaries do no rise, and so the numbers of individuals entering higher learning for a career do not increase.
When large corporations are seen to cheat the visa program (every large firm breaks the visa law in that they do not place Americans that can do the job first. Period. That's what the requirements of the statute demands, but is not enforced. So the actual impact is even larger than what it should be given the statute)
So the market always reacts the right way given the forces injected into it. in this case, h1b visas depress salaries because they are applied to cut costs rather than to fill unfilable openings (as detailed in the statute - how many that argue this subject have actually read the statute? If you haven't shame on you for even participating, your no better than the girls that were signing to end suffrage. They haven't read or remembered the subject, and don't know what is in the subject they are commenting on, but that d
If i could direct them to do any story (for a movie), i think i would go back to BEFORE there was a federation of planets... back to the time of the wars displayed by Q... where we somehow avoided borgism in ourselves and broke away from using inhancements in battle... there are some great plots possible... you can pull what plunged them in... or you can come in with the war in crescendo and no one being able to see the end, and then show how it collapsed and makes way for the federation future... did we get religion (turn of phrase), when we found out we werent the only ones? if our current system is eroding into some socialist system, what happened to suddenly change it back to the founding ideals of the dead white guys? what show really caused the demize of television and the self growth that would create a world where people put on play and such and performed for each other as they did in the age of the drawing room? while i have to admit that the kirk and spock thing is interesting, as spock would say... however, fruit flies are also interesting, and tons of other thigns too, and interesting doesnt cut it as a large screen entertainment source that will get me to spend 30 dollars out (for the evening). given the way they handled the corny first contact... maybe it is better they just stick to spock and kirk... there doesnt seem to be so much passion that they can hurt anything... i guess its a mixed blessing/curse
This discovery has NOTHING to do with antigravity. if you look they spliced their own crud into the quotes from the article!!!! move on, nothing here but a waste of time (participating in someones fantasies - never ceases to amaze me how they can look forward to fantasy and let their local reality rot. perhaps making your own life better might be a better choice than hoping for some super invention that wont improve your life in a time frame that you would be alive to enjoy it).
As an independent designer and inventor of IP i have one thing to say to your post. thffpppththththt!!
Lets see. would I:
A) not feel like bringing a great product to market myself and reaping all the benifits, but would rather spend much less and lie in wait just in case some other person needs what i invent. this with a less than 10% usability rate on patents in and of themselves.
B) be able to patent my idea, get backing, create an american company, hire people and improve lives, and be happy making the things i make WHILE being rewarded for them in my lifetime.
of course all inventors want A. thats what you imply.
by the way, you must hate artists too. they go out, spend 200 dollars on junk and walk away with 10 million!!! i mean what would happen if everyone did that? oh, they CAN. sorry.
well everyone who takes the time can invent as well. however, it takes lots and lots of work to be able to ahve the information in place to be able to make things work. its the infinite converging on a singularity.
what your doing is in essence complaining about the inventor, rather than complaining about a system that hamstrings anyone that doesnt go through corporate america!!!
want to get the info out on your idea? can't, you will lose your rights to whom you talk. (large corporations have legal departments and money, they will file just to reserve things later. so this isnt a problem for them, they get to get investors this way, you dont).
Want to perhaps promote your work through articles and such? can't, it puts a clock of one year on your work. (same answer as above for corporate america).
Perhaps you would like to submit your work to a company so they can review it? they wont look at your ideas unless they are already patented, putting a two to three year break on your ability to get out and into market (large corporations already have ip agreements and can cross share what they ahve. if you dont have a patent then you need an agreement of disclosure, which they wont sign (opens them up to lawsuits, of which, if you could afford, you wouldnt be seeking the other company!). taking a chance without the disclosure agreement gives them the idea without limitation. (this favors the large entities sitting still waiting for people to contact them, to which they dont reward them, they just take the ideas)
you just found out that a company incorporated your idea into their product after they saw it. then what do you get?
nothing. patents have to be fought on the holders dime. meanwhile the penalties are minimal, the proof is almost impossible, and the little guy has empty pockets for a 15 year several million dollar fight. so rather than pay him, they steal it. study patents, its almost the first thing you do if your a large company dealing with a small person. salivate actually comes first. also, after you win, how do you collect? you dont, they make more motions to keep the money out of your hands. hopefully for 7 years. why? because in seven years they would have earned waht they would have paid you out of interest and investing that amount, so now they can pay you in money they earned with the money they held from you. american business, you have to love it, no?
i could go on and on.
take the time to note how many great ideas were created by employees of said "great" companies. most do not get much of a reward.
what you dont realize is that you are whining on the side of the people that are cheating you!!!! i mean if it werent for those other inventors trying to make it on their own, these companies may be able to sew up the whole tech into a total monopoly that they can then charge what they want. i would whine too if i was them. i mean you spend billions on work and some small guy spending his life savings, and several years of work, comes along and figures out how to do it for a lot less money (since he didnt have any), in a better way. too bad he did it for 5 or so grand and y