You have a complete lack of understanding of the "system" in place here. UAW is not an employee of General Motors, its one of the largest shareholders--an owner. And when a publicly-held company goes into bankruptcy, its assets are sold to pay its debts. Those pieces are bought by other companies and are used by someone with better ideas and less attachment to past policies and mistakes.
By "bailing out" GM, the government ensured that all of the incompetent people at the helm didn't have to pay for their incompetence, and rather than a revitalization of the auto industry in America.
An important difference though: these are public employees. The parents of the children with whom they are employed to work should be able to participate in the evaluation process.
And with the absolutely abysmal state of the education system in the United States, neglecting to improve it is suicidal.
I'm storing both types of addresses using BINARY column types, with an additional TINYINT column to hold the length. For IPv4 addresses, it's 4, for IPv6, it's 16. And when IPv8 comes out, as long as PHP updates their inet_pton function, my code will work with no changes.
While Apple fights it, they put out solid hardware and software. They continue to update the product line, even though they've already sold the older products and have no direct financial gain from it. Why do they continue to support those products? Because consumers remember that, and are willing to buy products that they know Apple will update, rather than abandon.
I'm not talking about aftermarket mods, but your characterization of it is flawed: not all of it works, in fact much of it does not work. Especially for non-technically-oriented users who don't know which software they are able to use. There are dozens if not hundreds of sites, some of which contain conflicting information, conflicting updates, and software that may not work on every device. Since these sites are paid for by advertising, they have no incentive to be accurate, they have more incentive to show up in every search you do on Google.
Motorola has not supported that community at all. As an employee of Motorola, I dealt with a number of P2K software people. (They're all gone now.) MAGX and EZX didn't last for more than a year or two, and the platform is no longer under development. They did not assist the community, I believe the community has thrived only because the technology was so old and antiquated (10 YEARS!) that there are plenty of people in the community with experience with it.
I'm not suggesting that Motorola take "control" of the devices, but a software update after you purchase it would be nice. Especially considering the quality of the software the devices shipping with. And if you apply a software update that you download from a website, you're voiding the warranty and taking a chance that the device will be bricked. They used to provide software updates for iDen phones, but not for the majority of P2K phones.
The reason there is redundancy is the preparations they have been making for the past two years. As a company, they don't need to be focused on a single product or product line. That's not true for Microsoft, Apple, or most other successful large companies.
Motorola has had silo'd business units for ages. Mobile devices is already separate from the other units, and already has it's own "co-CEO". There's nothing about Motorola's other business units that precludes them working together. They're not in competition, after all; there's no overlap in their product lines. On the contrary, there are ways they could take advantage of expertise in one business unit to further the goals of the other.
The point is that the company can afford to keep the talent necessary to design and build handsets, as well as design and build silicon. The two are not mutually exclusive in a successful company, and there was no reason they could not coexist at Motorola.
I think this is an incredibly stupid decision. Motorola has sold off pieces of their business for cash over the years (spun off their IC division yet continued to buy ICs), while they also acquired other companies for various reasons.
Internally, the company's processes are woefully out of date, considering the ability of competitors like Nokia and Samsung to get products out the door. Splitting the company is not going to solve that.
As a consumer, Motorola has burned me too many times. Their philosophy seems to revolve around putting out as many products as possible, instead of supporting and increasing functionality in their existing product line. When you bought a Motorola handset in the past, you essentially bought a car--closed to the world, no software upgrades, and if you want a slight improvement, you must buy a new one. Contrast that with Apple, who continue to provide updates to their original hardware for years. Look at the resale value of Apple devices in all categories!
Phones are hardware, but the software is key. Motorola took years to realize that, and there are still plenty of people working for the company that have the wrong attitude in this regard. People like flashy hardware, but if the software is buggy and lacking functionality, they will turn to a new source.
Apple has very few products in their handset line, and they sell plenty of them. They also sell wireless networking equipment, and set-top boxes (Apple TV). They currently build, or at least commission, their own ICs (A4 processor). Apple is going stronger than ever. It seems that Motorola's executive leadership are about 5 years behind the times, not on top of the market like they should be. If they weren't so far behind, they would have seen the need for a decent software platform in 2002, and they would see Apple as an example that a multifaceted company can do well in business.
Instead, they milked the RAZR for years, and invested the money it earned in the other businesses, such as the acquisition of Symbol. Then once the mobile device devision was languishing, they wanted to split it away from the "profitable" business!
If I were you, I wouldn't place much stock in an opinion poll of residents of a Communist country. Asking those who can't speak freely what they think of the people that control their speech? What do you expect them to say?
In addition, the provider is labeled "Google Search Suggestions", while Bing is labeled "Bing Search". The description doesn't lead one to believe that it is actually a search provider. When I first started with IE8, I ran into this and was livid.
If only it were that easy. Unfortunately, corn has made its way into just about every single food sold in the US. This is because the US government is subsidizing the cost of corn. This also makes it a viable fuel substitute, though without the price-altering subsidies corn would be too expensive to replace petroleum-based fuel. Corn is so cheap in the US it has started to replace even soy in foods and other products that need starch or other derivatives.
This is yet another example of the US government interfering with the free market and causing problems. And since the Constitution forbids this type of meddling, it's rather surprising that it's allowed to continue. Perhaps US citizens are not as smart as they once were? For example, as smart as they were before the US government took over schooling?
Completely missing the point. PCs are all the same. They all run Windows, and all PC games use DirectX. With DirectX and other Windows abstraction layers, game developers don't have to know or care what hardware a person has.
Intemperate messages? The messages include instructions to delete emails regarding specific topics (which apparently were deleted), adding "garbage" data to study data analysis to cover up the lack of global temperature increase, and discussion of how to suppress journals that would dare to publish works that disprove anthropogenic global warming. There's more, but that's plenty for me!
You have to be completely up the anus of this scam to think that this is completely overblown. Like the New York Times. Here's a newsflash: you've been LIED TO. Or, if that doesn't fit, YOU'RE LYING.
Whose self-signed cert are you speaking of? If it's a server that belongs to you, create your own CA to sign it and install it on your system. If it's someone else's server, don't you think that maintaining a written list of every site's SSL certificate fingerprint would be a nightmare? One or two, sure, 5 even, but more? No thanks!
In your "example" the server is connected directly to your client. The comment to which I was replying did not specify that. It used an Internet connection through Comcast as the first connection to the server.
My statement still stands. If there is a router between you and the web server, you shouldn't trust the self-signed certificate you receive through that connection. You should verify the identity of the certificate rather than trusting it. If you are the owner of the server and the self-signer, then trust is not an issue.
Finally, I didn't say that your "home network" wasn't secure, I said that your home *connection* isn't necessarily trustworthy. Connection. To the Internet.
Civility be damned. You're just an anonymous asshole.
A self-signed certificate can reduce man-in-the-middle attacks. Here's how it works: I log on the first time from my home computer. Ideally, Firefox would prompt me once and I would choose "allow this certificate in the future" (without its current punitive user-interface). Because my home connection is mostly secure (Comcast isn't changing my data), I can subsequently log in from a coffee shop, I'll know that the certificate is legitimate, and I mostly trust the transaction.
Unless the MITM is closer to the web server than you. Just because you think your home connection is trustworthy doesn't make it so, and just because you're using a different Internet connection doesn't mean that it doesn't go through most of the same routers.
"Everyone" agrees that it's not sustainable. However, raising taxes is not the only way to reduce or eliminate the deficit. They need to STOP. SPENDING. MONEY.
All of that is correct. In addition, there are other states and localities where Amazon has a physical presence and therefore already collects sales tax for those sales.
I live in such an area. There's an Amazon warehouse about 10 miles from my house, I believe it's in my county. When I purchase from Amazon, they have to tax me on the sale regardless of whether they are shipping it from that warehouse.
My guess is that anyone that's willing to use a "good enough" editor is not currently using the Adobe suite, or if they are, didn't pay for it. Most developers are going to continue to use the tool they've been using, and they're only teaching the Adobe tools in school.
I don't see why it would be less profitable. They don't charge for the Flash client, only for the authoring tools.
Even if Silverlight were to take over, as long as Adobe makes a decent tool for creating Silverlight projects, they'll make close to the same amount. Although come to think of it, they may lose some sales only because they don't "own" the technology in consumers' eyes, and many consumers would buy Microsoft if they could anyway.
But since HTML5 is not owned by a company, it puts Adobe on equal footing with any other company making an editor. Consumers would be able to choose their editor, and Adobe has a well-established footing in the market. If they just changed their product to output HTML5 instead of or in addition to a swf file, they'll keep their strangehold on the editor market.
Yes. Just because some people who work for Obama and a couple local politicians say that there is shortage, doesn't mean there is one. According to the graphic on that article, there are four states with fewer than 70 doctors per 100,000 people, and the various states I've lived in have a below-average number of doctors.
Let's summarize the article:
Obama administration officials are alarmed at doctor shortages.
Family doctors and internists are pressing congress to pay them more money.
Many of the solutions proposed advance the actual goal of the Obama administration, which is to create government-run health care.
A Democrat from Nevada says that there are not enough doctors in primary care or in any specialty.
A Republic from Utah said something unintelligible about a work force.
There are various anecdotes that support this theory.
A Democrat from Montana says that the government is not paying doctors enough.
Orthopaedic surgeons don't want to be paid less.
The Association of American Medical Colleges wants more students.
Massachusetts has a problem which is not quite defined. The only statement is that there are people using emergency rooms for nonemergency care. Reasons not stated. Massachusetts has more doctors per capita than most other states.
There's a doctor in Idaho that flies to a nearby county because there are no doctors, even though the county is "bigger than Rhode Island". So let's check some facts...the census says there are about 4,000 people in the entire county. And note that the doctor isn't complaining, he's getting paid enough to fly there and see patients.
The government is running clinics and those clinics are having a hard time finding doctors and nurses. Could this be because few people want to work for government clinics? Unknown, they don't even speculate as the cause.
Looks like this article was written to give you the firm belief that there are shortages of doctors.
The US government spends money in the form of tax incentives to fund public awareness campaigns to decrease obesity, smoking, promote recycling, and dozens of other ideals. These things are taught in schools, pasted on bus stops, and played on television. There is no need for the health system itself to spend that money, because the government was already spending.
There is *no* shortage of general practitioners in actual fact, on a broad basis. Every time I look for a doctor in a new area, I find hundreds of family and general practices that are accepting new patients. (These are listed in the insurance provider directory.)
In the 12 years I've been raising kids, I've been on state-funded healthcare and three different employers' healthcare. All of them provided the same care at the same facilities, with roughly the same restrictions. Note that I said state-funded: this was provided by the state in which I resided, and paid for by state income tax, apparently with some Federal money as well. There is already this type of "insurance" in place for low-income households in the US.
To address the first part, all of the companies for whom I've worked had health programs promoting healthy lifestyles. This promotion is done by the employer and insurance provider because there is economic incentive to do so; for the provider to lower its healthcare costs, for the employer to lower the premiums it pays. I get mailers every few weeks encouraging healthy eating habits, exercise, etc.
There is also an enormous amount of sin tax on alcohol, tobacco, which are levied by the government for the dual purpose of taking money from idiots who can't fight back, and to make it more difficult for those idiots to drive intoxicated or harm those nearby with second-hand smoke. But IMHO it's mostly the former.
In addition, insurance providers specifically pay for check-ups on a regular basis for the purpose of "well-care". It saves the money in the long-run, and the doctor has incentive to see the patient for well-care because they get paid for it. Most people that I know still do not take advantage of that, and do not see doctors for years at a time. One example is dental cleanings. My dental insurance pays for two cleanings a year. If I don't go, they may save money in the short term, but they know they'll lose out long-term. My dentist reminds us through postcards and emails to get our cleanings, because he gets paid when he provides the service.
Also, HMOs are a choice of the person who subscribes to them, they're never the only option available. In Northern California, most people that I work with actually choose Kaiser each year over the alternative health insurance. There must be some reason for that.
I live in Cincinnati and I get 5 bars of AT&T 3G on my iPhone when I'm in the back of my basement in a Northern Kentucky suburb. It's fast, and everywhere I go in the city I get 3G and plenty of signal and data speed.
When I lived in Sunnyvale last year, I had frequent data slowdowns all over the valley due to the overload, but fairly reliable service in general. It's much better in the midwest, at least in this area.
But note that Cincinnati is bound to be targeted by AT&T because they are competing directly with Cincinnati Bell, who has their own GSM network in the region.
Slashdot Mirror
You have a complete lack of understanding of the "system" in place here. UAW is not an employee of General Motors, its one of the largest shareholders--an owner. And when a publicly-held company goes into bankruptcy, its assets are sold to pay its debts. Those pieces are bought by other companies and are used by someone with better ideas and less attachment to past policies and mistakes.
By "bailing out" GM, the government ensured that all of the incompetent people at the helm didn't have to pay for their incompetence, and rather than a revitalization of the auto industry in America.
An important difference though: these are public employees. The parents of the children with whom they are employed to work should be able to participate in the evaluation process.
And with the absolutely abysmal state of the education system in the United States, neglecting to improve it is suicidal.
I'm storing both types of addresses using BINARY column types, with an additional TINYINT column to hold the length. For IPv4 addresses, it's 4, for IPv6, it's 16. And when IPv8 comes out, as long as PHP updates their inet_pton function, my code will work with no changes.
While Apple fights it, they put out solid hardware and software. They continue to update the product line, even though they've already sold the older products and have no direct financial gain from it. Why do they continue to support those products? Because consumers remember that, and are willing to buy products that they know Apple will update, rather than abandon.
I'm not talking about aftermarket mods, but your characterization of it is flawed: not all of it works, in fact much of it does not work. Especially for non-technically-oriented users who don't know which software they are able to use. There are dozens if not hundreds of sites, some of which contain conflicting information, conflicting updates, and software that may not work on every device. Since these sites are paid for by advertising, they have no incentive to be accurate, they have more incentive to show up in every search you do on Google.
Motorola has not supported that community at all. As an employee of Motorola, I dealt with a number of P2K software people. (They're all gone now.) MAGX and EZX didn't last for more than a year or two, and the platform is no longer under development. They did not assist the community, I believe the community has thrived only because the technology was so old and antiquated (10 YEARS!) that there are plenty of people in the community with experience with it.
I'm not suggesting that Motorola take "control" of the devices, but a software update after you purchase it would be nice. Especially considering the quality of the software the devices shipping with. And if you apply a software update that you download from a website, you're voiding the warranty and taking a chance that the device will be bricked. They used to provide software updates for iDen phones, but not for the majority of P2K phones.
The reason there is redundancy is the preparations they have been making for the past two years. As a company, they don't need to be focused on a single product or product line. That's not true for Microsoft, Apple, or most other successful large companies.
Motorola has had silo'd business units for ages. Mobile devices is already separate from the other units, and already has it's own "co-CEO". There's nothing about Motorola's other business units that precludes them working together. They're not in competition, after all; there's no overlap in their product lines. On the contrary, there are ways they could take advantage of expertise in one business unit to further the goals of the other.
The point is that the company can afford to keep the talent necessary to design and build handsets, as well as design and build silicon. The two are not mutually exclusive in a successful company, and there was no reason they could not coexist at Motorola.
I think this is an incredibly stupid decision. Motorola has sold off pieces of their business for cash over the years (spun off their IC division yet continued to buy ICs), while they also acquired other companies for various reasons.
Internally, the company's processes are woefully out of date, considering the ability of competitors like Nokia and Samsung to get products out the door. Splitting the company is not going to solve that.
As a consumer, Motorola has burned me too many times. Their philosophy seems to revolve around putting out as many products as possible, instead of supporting and increasing functionality in their existing product line. When you bought a Motorola handset in the past, you essentially bought a car--closed to the world, no software upgrades, and if you want a slight improvement, you must buy a new one. Contrast that with Apple, who continue to provide updates to their original hardware for years. Look at the resale value of Apple devices in all categories!
Phones are hardware, but the software is key. Motorola took years to realize that, and there are still plenty of people working for the company that have the wrong attitude in this regard. People like flashy hardware, but if the software is buggy and lacking functionality, they will turn to a new source.
Apple has very few products in their handset line, and they sell plenty of them. They also sell wireless networking equipment, and set-top boxes (Apple TV). They currently build, or at least commission, their own ICs (A4 processor). Apple is going stronger than ever. It seems that Motorola's executive leadership are about 5 years behind the times, not on top of the market like they should be. If they weren't so far behind, they would have seen the need for a decent software platform in 2002, and they would see Apple as an example that a multifaceted company can do well in business.
Instead, they milked the RAZR for years, and invested the money it earned in the other businesses, such as the acquisition of Symbol. Then once the mobile device devision was languishing, they wanted to split it away from the "profitable" business!
If I were you, I wouldn't place much stock in an opinion poll of residents of a Communist country. Asking those who can't speak freely what they think of the people that control their speech? What do you expect them to say?
In addition, the provider is labeled "Google Search Suggestions", while Bing is labeled "Bing Search". The description doesn't lead one to believe that it is actually a search provider. When I first started with IE8, I ran into this and was livid.
If only it were that easy. Unfortunately, corn has made its way into just about every single food sold in the US. This is because the US government is subsidizing the cost of corn. This also makes it a viable fuel substitute, though without the price-altering subsidies corn would be too expensive to replace petroleum-based fuel. Corn is so cheap in the US it has started to replace even soy in foods and other products that need starch or other derivatives.
This is yet another example of the US government interfering with the free market and causing problems. And since the Constitution forbids this type of meddling, it's rather surprising that it's allowed to continue. Perhaps US citizens are not as smart as they once were? For example, as smart as they were before the US government took over schooling?
Completely missing the point. PCs are all the same. They all run Windows, and all PC games use DirectX. With DirectX and other Windows abstraction layers, game developers don't have to know or care what hardware a person has.
Intemperate messages? The messages include instructions to delete emails regarding specific topics (which apparently were deleted), adding "garbage" data to study data analysis to cover up the lack of global temperature increase, and discussion of how to suppress journals that would dare to publish works that disprove anthropogenic global warming. There's more, but that's plenty for me! You have to be completely up the anus of this scam to think that this is completely overblown. Like the New York Times. Here's a newsflash: you've been LIED TO. Or, if that doesn't fit, YOU'RE LYING.
And how much does it cost to hire accountants and lawyers to exploit those loopholes?
Whose self-signed cert are you speaking of? If it's a server that belongs to you, create your own CA to sign it and install it on your system. If it's someone else's server, don't you think that maintaining a written list of every site's SSL certificate fingerprint would be a nightmare? One or two, sure, 5 even, but more? No thanks!
In your "example" the server is connected directly to your client. The comment to which I was replying did not specify that. It used an Internet connection through Comcast as the first connection to the server. My statement still stands. If there is a router between you and the web server, you shouldn't trust the self-signed certificate you receive through that connection. You should verify the identity of the certificate rather than trusting it. If you are the owner of the server and the self-signer, then trust is not an issue. Finally, I didn't say that your "home network" wasn't secure, I said that your home *connection* isn't necessarily trustworthy. Connection. To the Internet. Civility be damned. You're just an anonymous asshole.
A self-signed certificate can reduce man-in-the-middle attacks. Here's how it works: I log on the first time from my home computer. Ideally, Firefox would prompt me once and I would choose "allow this certificate in the future" (without its current punitive user-interface). Because my home connection is mostly secure (Comcast isn't changing my data), I can subsequently log in from a coffee shop, I'll know that the certificate is legitimate, and I mostly trust the transaction.
Unless the MITM is closer to the web server than you. Just because you think your home connection is trustworthy doesn't make it so, and just because you're using a different Internet connection doesn't mean that it doesn't go through most of the same routers.
The Sony store in Valley Fair mall was still open when I last saw it in October last year. According to the mall website, it's still there.
"Everyone" agrees that it's not sustainable. However, raising taxes is not the only way to reduce or eliminate the deficit. They need to STOP. SPENDING. MONEY.
All of that is correct. In addition, there are other states and localities where Amazon has a physical presence and therefore already collects sales tax for those sales. I live in such an area. There's an Amazon warehouse about 10 miles from my house, I believe it's in my county. When I purchase from Amazon, they have to tax me on the sale regardless of whether they are shipping it from that warehouse.
My guess is that anyone that's willing to use a "good enough" editor is not currently using the Adobe suite, or if they are, didn't pay for it. Most developers are going to continue to use the tool they've been using, and they're only teaching the Adobe tools in school.
I don't see why it would be less profitable. They don't charge for the Flash client, only for the authoring tools.
Even if Silverlight were to take over, as long as Adobe makes a decent tool for creating Silverlight projects, they'll make close to the same amount. Although come to think of it, they may lose some sales only because they don't "own" the technology in consumers' eyes, and many consumers would buy Microsoft if they could anyway.
But since HTML5 is not owned by a company, it puts Adobe on equal footing with any other company making an editor. Consumers would be able to choose their editor, and Adobe has a well-established footing in the market. If they just changed their product to output HTML5 instead of or in addition to a swf file, they'll keep their strangehold on the editor market.
Yes. Just because some people who work for Obama and a couple local politicians say that there is shortage, doesn't mean there is one. According to the graphic on that article, there are four states with fewer than 70 doctors per 100,000 people, and the various states I've lived in have a below-average number of doctors.
Let's summarize the article:
Looks like this article was written to give you the firm belief that there are shortages of doctors.
Wish I had more time to write a reply.
The US government spends money in the form of tax incentives to fund public awareness campaigns to decrease obesity, smoking, promote recycling, and dozens of other ideals. These things are taught in schools, pasted on bus stops, and played on television. There is no need for the health system itself to spend that money, because the government was already spending.
There is *no* shortage of general practitioners in actual fact, on a broad basis. Every time I look for a doctor in a new area, I find hundreds of family and general practices that are accepting new patients. (These are listed in the insurance provider directory.)
In the 12 years I've been raising kids, I've been on state-funded healthcare and three different employers' healthcare. All of them provided the same care at the same facilities, with roughly the same restrictions. Note that I said state-funded: this was provided by the state in which I resided, and paid for by state income tax, apparently with some Federal money as well. There is already this type of "insurance" in place for low-income households in the US.
To address the first part, all of the companies for whom I've worked had health programs promoting healthy lifestyles. This promotion is done by the employer and insurance provider because there is economic incentive to do so; for the provider to lower its healthcare costs, for the employer to lower the premiums it pays. I get mailers every few weeks encouraging healthy eating habits, exercise, etc.
There is also an enormous amount of sin tax on alcohol, tobacco, which are levied by the government for the dual purpose of taking money from idiots who can't fight back, and to make it more difficult for those idiots to drive intoxicated or harm those nearby with second-hand smoke. But IMHO it's mostly the former.
In addition, insurance providers specifically pay for check-ups on a regular basis for the purpose of "well-care". It saves the money in the long-run, and the doctor has incentive to see the patient for well-care because they get paid for it. Most people that I know still do not take advantage of that, and do not see doctors for years at a time. One example is dental cleanings. My dental insurance pays for two cleanings a year. If I don't go, they may save money in the short term, but they know they'll lose out long-term. My dentist reminds us through postcards and emails to get our cleanings, because he gets paid when he provides the service.
Also, HMOs are a choice of the person who subscribes to them, they're never the only option available. In Northern California, most people that I work with actually choose Kaiser each year over the alternative health insurance. There must be some reason for that.
In my paperback copy, it was 120 pages. I read the first 10.
I live in Cincinnati and I get 5 bars of AT&T 3G on my iPhone when I'm in the back of my basement in a Northern Kentucky suburb. It's fast, and everywhere I go in the city I get 3G and plenty of signal and data speed.
When I lived in Sunnyvale last year, I had frequent data slowdowns all over the valley due to the overload, but fairly reliable service in general. It's much better in the midwest, at least in this area.
But note that Cincinnati is bound to be targeted by AT&T because they are competing directly with Cincinnati Bell, who has their own GSM network in the region.