I say even 1 cent is worth something I'm still am trying to figure out a way to get every man woman and child in America all 300,000,000 to give me just 1 penny every year. I think I could scrape by on a paltry $3,000,000/year
I can't wait till Billy G, or Stevey B get's a bill from Bellsouth for 5 cents a security patch automaticaly downloaded from "Windows Update". That will go over like a fart in church. This thing is going straight to court, but fast!
No way in Shit's Creek would Google do that, customer X would call up bellsouth, and say google's not working because of X, and they'd say try Yahoo, or Microsoft search. Apple might boycot, particularly if they try to do the 5 cent's a song crap, considering their player isn't Microsoft DRM compatible too, all those Bellsouther's that got a shiny new nano for th holidays would be pretty peeved. Google boycotting no way in heck, they might sue for some reason or other, but this is going to certainly end up in court.
"The instant they start doing this, they lose the protection of 'Common Carrier' and instantly become legally liable for anything any of their customers do. Either their lawyers are idiots -- for not realizing this, or thinking they have a loophole -- or the PHB's aren't listening."
I have to plead ignorant on this one any chance you could describe what
You're right my real issue isn't with the individual/genuinly small buisiness, it's with the big ones that will get everything at a 23% dicount, and contribute nothing to the government.
I was just trying to say that the majority of rich people have a good number of people working for them to hide income, find loopholes, and those people do a darn good job of it. I'm being dead serious about the automobile tax write offs by the way, and that disgusts me. I know a good number of $250,000 - $1,000,000 and they don't spend like the fair tax faq would suggest, and certainly not enough to cover loosing payrole taxes.
Because it's realy just a way for big buisiness to walk around getting taxed, you're either promoting it because you're a buisiness, and are savvy to what it's realy for. Or you havn't realy read that deep into it.
A solution is the fair tax, but it's boring to one half of the population and misunderstood by the other half, so expect to continue to get screwed by the partnership between big government and big business.
Uh the fair tax would be a partnership between big government and big business, in an effort to screw the rest of us...
Ahh but the devil is in the details isn't it? I would consider my car basic necessity, and while a $20,000 car I'd say was a basic necessity, is the same true for a $100,000 one?
From the FAQ:
"Is consumption a reliable source of revenue? Yes, in fact, consumption is a more stable source of revenue than income. A recent study by former American Farm Bureau economist Ross Korves shows the FairTax base is less variable than the income tax base. Why? Because during difficult times due to loss of a job or an inability to work, people may not have as much income, or may have no income at all. They borrow funds or use savings. They may not have earnings, but they still continue to consume. Korves's Figure 2 below shows the yearly changes in the tax base, adjusted gross income (AGI) under the current tax system for 1971-2001, and changes in personal consumption expenditures (PCE) of the same time period." Are they purchasing "basic necessities", or taxable goods in these periods?
"Yes, the FairTax is fair, and in fact, much fairer than the income tax. Wealthy people spend more money than other individuals. They buy expensive cars, big houses, and yachts. They buy filet mignon instead of hamburger, fine wine instead of beer, designer dresses, and expensive jewelry. The FairTax taxes them on these purchases..." Ever heard of the millionaire next door? where do they dry dock their yacht when they're not towing it behind their 4 year old Honda Accord?
"If, however, they use their money to build job-creating factories, finance research and development to create new products, or fund charitable activities (all of which help improve the standard of living of others), then those activities are not taxed." Anyone know someone that puts their BMW down as a business expense? I can name 2. How about the guy that says his Porsche Cayenne SUV is a work truck, and writes it off as a tax deduction, I know one of those too!
"When corporate income taxes are repealed, pre-tax prices can come down an average of 22 percent for goods and 25 percent for services according to Dale Jorgenson, Ph.D., former chairman of the Harvard University Economics Department. Furthermore, used goods are not taxed because they have already been taxed once - when they were new. Therefore senior citizens, like all Americans, do not lose purchasing power, but gain it instead." How does replacing a 22% savings on goods, and replacing it with a 23% tax result in a savings?
I can't do this anymore, this is a BS pro-business, at the expense of the little-middle guy tax plan. They want to get rid of payroll taxes, plain and simple. It's all outlined right here.
"If, however, they use their money to build job-creating factories, finance research and development to create new products" they will now be tax-exempt"
So now that money is gone. Where do those job creating factories get built? Heck even if they're built in America, they still buy all the materials and labor tax-free, and the guy swinging the hammer making jack-50 an hour is now hoofing the tax burden. Yeah, nice plan... Heck I'm all for it actually, I have an addition I want to put on my house, I'll call it a home-office, and get it a 23% rebate. And the guy making still has to pay a 23% tax rate. I have the money, I already have an LLC, this thing is right up my alley! I can see no reason why this would be bad for ME... now the other 90% of the population, well... screw them I'm getting tired of dry docking my yacht... that I... uh use... uh solely to... uh... um... um... uh! Entertain potential customers, and go on work related trips to, and from Miami, NY, and my suppliers in the Bahamas. I could also use a 23% discount on a purely "business use only" Learjet also....Shmucks
I think you're looking past the point, the problem isn't just Laura Croft, it's practically ALL women in gaming. And you can't compare movies/TV actors to video game characters. Rosanne Bar was a leading character, and John Goodman played a supporting role. Kathy Bates, Calista Flockhart, Sarah Jessica Parker, the "On Golden Pond" Katharine Hepburn, all of these women were given leads. It's hard to think of a game where women that look like these could even find an ancillary role, let alone be allowed to carny the whole game. Granted it's hard to think of Katharine Hepburn mowing down zombies in between reloads, but that's also part of the problem with video games today. Their just kill-fests, honestly the reason women don't play games isn't because they're not marketed towards them, the truth of the mater is that games today suck, and only the women and men(myself included) shallow enough not to care about how flimsy/flaky every game out there is, will play them. It's shocking to me that anyone plays non multiplayer/party games outside of puzzle games(Tetris/Dr. Mari). Games today are shallow and HIGHLY repetitive. And the women and men that don't play them can't/don't want to/shouldn't have to look past all there shortcomings.
It's not the way women are portrayed in games that turns off most women. The way women are portrayed in games turns off the women that play games. It's the games themselves that turn the rest of the women off games. Ho many girls do you know of don't like "Legally Blond"? When I saw that all I could think of is my god how crappy shallow can a crappy movie be, and then every women I knew told me they loved that pile of crap. It's not hot women that dress weird that turn women off of games. It's the crappy boring games that we buy that turn women off of games.
I have no clue who those people are, and if they're actors good for them, if they're writers good for them also. And if they're characters I don't care. I never said all I said most. Go watch the Sci-Fi channel for 4 hours if you can bare it. Not only is there just one good show on it most of the rest are all crap, staring the same leading character, with the same supporting roled female.
The big problem with video game female leads is the same problem with the majority of Sci-Fi female leads, and that is they tend to fall into two generic category's, Laura Croft, or Princess Toadstool. Women in both genres/mediums are either there as an object to be rescued, and as always is the case, fall madly in love with the protagonist just because he saved her. Or to be a gun toting take no prisoners b#$@h that will throw the slap down on you and ride you a#! like she would a wild stallion. The problem is that most Sci-Fi shows are written, directed, and edited by men, and the same thing goes for video games. The upsetting fact is that the guys that make, these stories really should not have been given right to write in the first place.
The crux of the matter is, to make good female, and male leads in games, requires the removal of weapons. Creating a game where head-shotting isn't the solution to any, and all problems is never going to appeal to the majority of people male, or female. Just look at the numbers, the best selling genre out there is sports, not FPS's.
I second this, as long as you're careful about the programs you running ie: you know they don't contain trojans a plane jane NAT router is a great firewall. If the computer is being used for noncommercial purposes, I'd also recommend using AVG Antivirus Free edition. It's totally free for NONCOMMERCIAL use, and has served me well over the years. You can get it here
I mean looking at that Soekris board it looks perfect for you. I mean you don't need a processor that's that fast. After all it only has 3 100 mbit connections, that's just 75 megabytes/sec bandwidth if it's full duplex. That's peanuts in the computer world, like a 486 maybe Pentium 1 bandwidth. If ram is a concern it looks like it takes a SO-DIM, right their on the board... call them up and ask them to clarify. I'd say for what you're looking for that thing is perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
If I only had mod points. This is good, info, that should be shared.
And did that stop him from buying them, was what I was hinting at.
I don't get it, please explain.
I get jokes!
In India that is. Isn't that going to be a big part of wether or not the 360 is going to be a hit or not?
And you think that the A64, and P4 are clean and squaeky?
I say even 1 cent is worth something I'm still am trying to figure out a way to get every man woman and child in America all 300,000,000 to give me just 1 penny every year. I think I could scrape by on a paltry $3,000,000/year
-matt
Arn't Pennies ove 90% Zinc?
And don't batteries use a good amount of copper in them?
I can't wait till Billy G, or Stevey B get's a bill from Bellsouth for 5 cents a security patch automaticaly downloaded from "Windows Update".
That will go over like a fart in church. This thing is going straight to court, but fast!
-manno
No way in Shit's Creek would Google do that, customer X would call up bellsouth, and say google's not working because of X, and they'd say try Yahoo, or Microsoft search. Apple might boycot, particularly if they try to do the 5 cent's a song crap, considering their player isn't Microsoft DRM compatible too, all those Bellsouther's that got a shiny new nano for th holidays would be pretty peeved. Google boycotting no way in heck, they might sue for some reason or other, but this is going to certainly end up in court.
-manno
"The instant they start doing this, they lose the protection of 'Common Carrier' and instantly become legally liable for anything any of their customers do. Either their lawyers are idiots -- for not realizing this, or thinking they have a loophole -- or the PHB's aren't listening."
I have to plead ignorant on this one any chance you could describe what
the protection of 'Common Carrier' is?
-manno
I'm on the same page.
I have never owned a mac, and have never wanted one... until right now.
You're right my real issue isn't with the individual/genuinly small buisiness, it's with the big ones that will get everything at a 23% dicount, and contribute nothing to the government.
I was just trying to say that the majority of rich people have a good number of people working for them to hide income, find loopholes, and those people do a darn good job of it. I'm being dead serious about the automobile tax write offs by the way, and that disgusts me. I know a good number of $250,000 - $1,000,000 and they don't spend like the fair tax faq would suggest, and certainly not enough to cover loosing payrole taxes.
http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=17195 3&cid=14320566
Because it's realy just a way for big buisiness to walk around getting taxed, you're either promoting it because you're a buisiness, and are savvy to what it's realy for. Or you havn't realy read that deep into it.
it's not a fair tax it's an effort by big buisiness to get rid of payroll taxes.5 3&cid=14320566
http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1719
A solution is the fair tax, but it's boring to one half of the population and misunderstood by the other half, so expect to continue to get screwed by the partnership between big government and big business.
3 20566
Uh the fair tax would be a partnership between big government and big business, in an effort to screw the rest of us...
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=171953&cid=14
Ahh but the devil is in the details isn't it? I would consider my car basic necessity, and while a $20,000 car I'd say was a basic necessity, is the same true for a $100,000 one?
... uh use... uh solely to... uh... um... um... uh! Entertain potential customers, and go on work related trips to, and from Miami, NY, and my suppliers in the Bahamas. I could also use a 23% discount on a purely "business use only" Learjet also. ...Shmucks
From the FAQ:
"Is consumption a reliable source of revenue? Yes, in fact, consumption is a more stable source of revenue than income. A recent study by former American Farm Bureau economist Ross Korves shows the FairTax base is less variable than the income tax base. Why? Because during difficult times due to loss of a job or an inability to work, people may not have as much income, or may have no income at all. They borrow funds or use savings. They may not have earnings, but they still continue to consume. Korves's Figure 2 below shows the yearly changes in the tax base, adjusted gross income (AGI) under the current tax system for 1971-2001, and changes in personal consumption expenditures (PCE) of the same time period."
Are they purchasing "basic necessities", or taxable goods in these periods?
"Yes, the FairTax is fair, and in fact, much fairer than the income tax. Wealthy people spend more money than other individuals. They buy expensive cars, big houses, and yachts. They buy filet mignon instead of hamburger, fine wine instead of beer, designer dresses, and expensive jewelry. The FairTax taxes them on these purchases..."
Ever heard of the millionaire next door? where do they dry dock their yacht when they're not towing it behind their 4 year old Honda Accord?
"If, however, they use their money to build job-creating factories, finance research and development to create new products, or fund charitable activities (all of which help improve the standard of living of others), then those activities are not taxed."
Anyone know someone that puts their BMW down as a business expense? I can name 2. How about the guy that says his Porsche Cayenne SUV is a work truck, and writes it off as a tax deduction, I know one of those too!
"When corporate income taxes are repealed, pre-tax prices can come down an average of 22 percent for goods and 25 percent for services according to Dale Jorgenson, Ph.D., former chairman of the Harvard University Economics Department. Furthermore, used goods are not taxed because they have already been taxed once - when they were new. Therefore senior citizens, like all Americans, do not lose purchasing power, but gain it instead."
How does replacing a 22% savings on goods, and replacing it with a 23% tax result in a savings?
I can't do this anymore, this is a BS pro-business, at the expense of the little-middle guy tax plan. They want to get rid of payroll taxes, plain and simple. It's all outlined right here.
"If, however, they use their money to build job-creating factories, finance research and development to create new products" they will now be tax-exempt"
So now that money is gone. Where do those job creating factories get built? Heck even if they're built in America, they still buy all the materials and labor tax-free, and the guy swinging the hammer making jack-50 an hour is now hoofing the tax burden. Yeah, nice plan... Heck I'm all for it actually, I have an addition I want to put on my house, I'll call it a home-office, and get it a 23% rebate. And the guy making still has to pay a 23% tax rate. I have the money, I already have an LLC, this thing is right up my alley! I can see no reason why this would be bad for ME... now the other 90% of the population, well... screw them I'm getting tired of dry docking my yacht... that I
Come on your kidding, is it realy that bad?
ditto
Where's the 3 core Mac G5 at that speed holy sizzle!
I think you're looking past the point, the problem isn't just Laura Croft, it's practically ALL women in gaming. And you can't compare movies/TV actors to video game characters. Rosanne Bar was a leading character, and John Goodman played a supporting role. Kathy Bates, Calista Flockhart, Sarah Jessica Parker, the "On Golden Pond" Katharine Hepburn, all of these women were given leads. It's hard to think of a game where women that look like these could even find an ancillary role, let alone be allowed to carny the whole game. Granted it's hard to think of Katharine Hepburn mowing down zombies in between reloads, but that's also part of the problem with video games today. Their just kill-fests, honestly the reason women don't play games isn't because they're not marketed towards them, the truth of the mater is that games today suck, and only the women and men(myself included) shallow enough not to care about how flimsy/flaky every game out there is, will play them. It's shocking to me that anyone plays non multiplayer/party games outside of puzzle games(Tetris/Dr. Mari). Games today are shallow and HIGHLY repetitive. And the women and men that don't play them can't/don't want to/shouldn't have to look past all there shortcomings.
It's not the way women are portrayed in games that turns off most women. The way women are portrayed in games turns off the women that play games. It's the games themselves that turn the rest of the women off games. Ho many girls do you know of don't like "Legally Blond"? When I saw that all I could think of is my god how crappy shallow can a crappy movie be, and then every women I knew told me they loved that pile of crap. It's not hot women that dress weird that turn women off of games. It's the crappy boring games that we buy that turn women off of games.
-manno
I have no clue who those people are, and if they're actors good for them, if they're writers good for them also. And if they're characters I don't care. I never said all I said most. Go watch the Sci-Fi channel for 4 hours if you can bare it. Not only is there just one good show on it most of the rest are all crap, staring the same leading character, with the same supporting roled female.
-manno
The big problem with video game female leads is the same problem with the majority of Sci-Fi female leads, and that is they tend to fall into two generic category's, Laura Croft, or Princess Toadstool. Women in both genres/mediums are either there as an object to be rescued, and as always is the case, fall madly in love with the protagonist just because he saved her. Or to be a gun toting take no prisoners b#$@h that will throw the slap down on you and ride you a#! like she would a wild stallion. The problem is that most Sci-Fi shows are written, directed, and edited by men, and the same thing goes for video games. The upsetting fact is that the guys that make, these stories really should not have been given right to write in the first place.
The crux of the matter is, to make good female, and male leads in games, requires the removal of weapons. Creating a game where head-shotting isn't the solution to any, and all problems is never going to appeal to the majority of people male, or female. Just look at the numbers, the best selling genre out there is sports, not FPS's.
-manno
I second this, as long as you're careful about the programs you running ie: you know they don't contain trojans a plane jane NAT router is a great firewall. If the computer is being used for noncommercial purposes, I'd also recommend using AVG Antivirus Free edition. It's totally free for NONCOMMERCIAL use, and has served me well over the years. You can get it here
http://free.grisoft.com/doc/2/lng/us/tpl/v5
-manno
I mean looking at that Soekris board it looks perfect for you. I mean you don't need a processor that's that fast. After all it only has 3 100 mbit connections, that's just 75 megabytes/sec bandwidth if it's full duplex. That's peanuts in the computer world, like a 486 maybe Pentium 1 bandwidth. If ram is a concern it looks like it takes a SO-DIM, right their on the board... call them up and ask them to clarify. I'd say for what you're looking for that thing is perfect.
-manno