Goldman Sachs did no such thing. The number cooking Goldman Sachs did occurred after the qualifications and had no impact on whether Greece qualified or not.
From the wiki: An error frequently made in press reports, is the confusion of the discussion regarding Greece’s Eurozone entry with the controversy regarding usage of derivatives’ deals with U.S. Banks by Greece and other Eurozone countries to artificially reduce their reported budget deficits. A currency swap arranged with Goldman Sachs allowed Greece to 'hide' 2.8 billion Euros of debt, however, this affected deficit values after 2001 (when Greece had already been admitted into the Eurozone) and is not related to Greece’s Eurozone entry.
One more thing to note - yes, the calculations made to justify the Greek entry into the EUR were "creative" to put it mildly. Greece never did actually qualify. Interestingly though, neither did a number of other countries, for example Italy, Spain and Portugal (who are often mentioned) but also France and Germany (who are usually not mentioned as being creative with their accounting). Some of the countries took a while to formally (if not actually) get in line with the rules. Germany took longer than most.
then we can tell it was just horse shit without even viewing it
Sorry, you are wrong. Eurostat stated, again and again, that Greece didn't qualify. Eurostat was told, again and again, by mainly German and French politicians, that this was an unacceptable conclusion no matter what relationship it had with the truth. Don't start talking about Goldman Sachs, the magic of Goldman Sachs took place after Greece was already admitted to the EUR, and had no impact on its admission.
You have swallowed the PR from the German Ministry of War hook, line and sinker and are now what Stalin used to call "a useful idiot".
Who said the Eurocrats believed what Greece told them?
The Eurocrats (represented by Eurostat) never believed Greece, or, they did, since the reports out of Greece always said that Greece was unqualified. The politicians of Germany and France would not accept that that was the answer though. The politicians felt that it was important to let Greece in no matter what. The "rules" where therefore altered again and again, and even though Eurostat clearly stated Greece was not qualified, they were let in.
There is in fact no reason to think that Greece lied, the rules were so muddled and riddled with exceptions etc that it is quite probable that the Greek ministry of finance actually thought they qualified. Perhaps they even did.
Some might bring up Goldman Sachs at this point and how they helped Greece hide about 2.8bn in debt, but that move is irrelevant since it occurred after Greece was admitted into the EUR.
It may be hard to understand, but in reality it is quite simple:
Greece never qualified for entry into the EUR. Ever. Eurostat said this again and again. The politicians of EU demanded, again and again, that Eurostat revise its numbers so that Greece would qualify. In other words, EU politicians were going to get Greece into the EUR no matter what. Greece also desired this, but so did France and Germany. To the extent that they eventually threw the rule book out and admitted Greece.
Side note - some will point to the Goldman Sachs situation where they "hid" EUR 2.8bn in Greek debt, which was a dubious move for sure, but it had no impact on Greece joining the EUR. People bring up this all the time, but it is in fact irrelevant. Greece had already been admitted into the EUR when Goldman Sachs pulled it's magic, and it had no impact on Greece being inside or outside of the EUR.
So, the non-qualified Greece is let into the EUR and things start going sideways quickly. Partly because the EUR is not a suitable currency for Greece, but also because the ide of the EUR is fundamentally retarded in the first place. You can have a single currency in an area with a single fiscal policy, a single central bank and (in effect) a single minister of finance. This means that you can have a single currency when you have a single foreign (and mostly domestic) political scene. In other words, Europe got it ass backwards. You can't use a single currency to create a cohesive singe federation with a single government, you can have a single currency after you have a single federation with a single (mostly) government. Europe is not ready for that solution, and probably won't be for at least a century.
Now, things are moving sideways in pear-shaped boats, and we hit the financial crisis of 2007-08. Basically, incapable of adjusting by using fiscal policies, Greece completely collapses. Given the above, this is inevitable, and the main cause of the collapse is that Greece has no real control over its fiscal policies - in other words, the Greek collapse is mainly caused by them being in the EUR and not having its own currency. Thanks to German and French politicians who wanted this despite the idiocy of it. Under pressure Greece begs for help. It doesn't get any. It's given loans. That's like giving new credit cards to a kid that has just over-drawn five of them. Its idiotic, moronic and seriously counter productive. It also comes with serious strings attached.
What does Germany do after Greece basically has collapsed and begged for help? They lend money to Greece, with strings attached. "You gotta buy three submarines from us". "You have to buy five frigates from France too". In other words, not only do EU do the decidedly moronic thing of lending Greece money, they also force Greece to spend up the wazoo with their new credit cards. This is not only unhelpful, it is basically tantamount to a declaration of war. The added debt is used to force Greece to sell of national assets to German and French companies. So the war makers are now getting their grubby hands on Greek property and national assets without firing a shot. Finally, by forcing Greece to take loans and implement austerity measures that are designed to ensure Greece can never grow its economy, Germany makes sure that there is no practical way Greece will forever be slaves to their European overlords.
This crisis was caused by Germany and France forcing Eurostat to "change the rules" to let Greece in. It was exacerbated by instead of helping out when the crisis hit, they made it worse by forcing more debt on Greece and forcing austerity measures that are designed to prevent economic growth.
Angela Markel is missing two personal features, a curiously stiff right arm and a silly little mustache, but other than that, she handles Greece in the way Germany always thought Greece should be handled. Angela is also using monetary measures rather than paratroops to terrorize the Greek citizenry, but that is a technicality.
Bzzzzzt! Wrong. Let me use an example. Marriage gives you certain rights and privileges if your partner is hospitalized or even dies. They have nothing to do with procreation at all. Also, they do not pertain to singles since singles have no.partners. You are hiding your bigotry behind your ignorance. Get educated!
Or, perhaps he"s not an English native with "only" a reasonable grasp of English while you are one of those ignorant, moronic Americans who thinks English is the only language used in the world. You know: The bible is written in English and if English was good enough for Jesus then it should be good enough for the Spanish.
Retard!
You need to learn the difference between "is" and "I think it should be". Morality has less value, overall, than the dog shit I just stepped in. Want the litmus test? If you were right, your understanding of moral would have equal value to the moral of the leadership of the ISIL.
Apparently this thing will deliver about 2kW sustained when in use. What? My water heater draws 2.2kW. It wont even be able to serve me tea, and I'm not even British. My AC draws about 1.2kW. My iron draws more than my water cooker.
Sorry, this is, at this, and quite significantly lower, price point(s) is a joke.
The two main things that are limiting are that you can't take advantage of the unique strengths of the particular device you're running on
There was a reason I wanted specifics. This is a generic comment and it generally isn't particularly accurate anymore. Do you know of any specific things that would suffer on any specific platform?
performance always (and inevitably) suffers
Again, not specific, and generally extremely far from the truth. Yes, Javascript runs slower than native code, but that isn't necessarily an issue. It depends on what your app does. Many, many apps are not calculation heavy, they collect data from a back-end server, present it to the user, allow the user to alter the data in some ways and then send the data back to the server. Any slowness in such application will be caused, by network slowness in almost all cases. In other words, the performance of the underlying GUI language is mostly irrelevant as long as it is fast enough, and Javascript is, for a huge number of applications.
So, at this point in time you have not given any kind of arguments that supports your position.
Have you developed applications in Javascript that suffered performance wise? Have you developed any mobile applications that you assume would suffer performance wise?
It's easy to parrot the "wisdom" of others, that's why I asked you to be specific. You weren't.
but a car is carbon neutral as well. It produces as much carbon as it consumes
You really need to share some of the drugs you are taking. They must be awesome. So, what kind of photosynthesis does a car do?
the addition of a forest where previously there was not is a carbon sink
Yes, for a little while. In the fastest growing period. Once the forest is somewhat established, the rotting processes etc in that forest will produce as much carbon as the forest consumes. Sure, the growth stage is semi-long in human terms, but it is both far too slow and far too inefficient to do anything about our current emissions.
As for cars, putting any kind of restrictions on cars to curb CO2 emissions is retarded, since personal transport constitutes a tiny part (4-5%) of the total CO2 emissions. Going electrical is retarded since the electricity used to drive the car is, in the end, produced by burning coal. None of the current efforts to curb CO2 emissions have any theoretical possibility of making a dent in CO2 emissions since they do not encourage, or enforce, a reduction in (or stopping of) the burning of coal.
Germany has gone to 30-40% electricity production using renewable energy. Still, their CO2 emissions have increased at exactly the same rate as the rest of the world. For two main reasons - 1/ The morons are shutting down nuclear plants, and 2/ when mixing renewable energy and fossil burning, the fossil burning becomes far less efficient and the CO2 emissions from coal and oil increases quite significantly.
solar-powered green chemistry using sequestered carbon dioxide
Sorry to disappoint you. A forest is carbon neutral. It produces as much CO2 as it consumes. Your suggestion will have no impact on CO2 removed from the air.
.NET is fluff? The C# compiler is fluff? What specifically does MS need to open for it not to be fluff? Windows? It's obviously a topic within Microsoft.
Giving tools to developers for lock-in technologies
Yeah, you are right. They have only open-sourced.NET and it is now available on all major (and quite a few minor) platforms. They have open sourced the C# compiler. They have open sourced just about anything web related they are doing. So, what else should they open source? Windows? According to Microsoft that is apparently also an option they keep open.
Slashdot Mirror
Goldman Sachs did no such thing. The number cooking Goldman Sachs did occurred after the qualifications and had no impact on whether Greece qualified or not.
From the wiki:
An error frequently made in press reports, is the confusion of the discussion regarding Greece’s Eurozone entry with the controversy regarding usage of derivatives’ deals with U.S. Banks by Greece and other Eurozone countries to artificially reduce their reported budget deficits. A currency swap arranged with Goldman Sachs allowed Greece to 'hide' 2.8 billion Euros of debt, however, this affected deficit values after 2001 (when Greece had already been admitted into the Eurozone) and is not related to Greece’s Eurozone entry.
One more thing to note - yes, the calculations made to justify the Greek entry into the EUR were "creative" to put it mildly. Greece never did actually qualify. Interestingly though, neither did a number of other countries, for example Italy, Spain and Portugal (who are often mentioned) but also France and Germany (who are usually not mentioned as being creative with their accounting). Some of the countries took a while to formally (if not actually) get in line with the rules. Germany took longer than most.
then we can tell it was just horse shit without even viewing it
Sorry, you are wrong. Eurostat stated, again and again, that Greece didn't qualify. Eurostat was told, again and again, by mainly German and French politicians, that this was an unacceptable conclusion no matter what relationship it had with the truth. Don't start talking about Goldman Sachs, the magic of Goldman Sachs took place after Greece was already admitted to the EUR, and had no impact on its admission.
You have swallowed the PR from the German Ministry of War hook, line and sinker and are now what Stalin used to call "a useful idiot".
Who said the Eurocrats believed what Greece told them?
The Eurocrats (represented by Eurostat) never believed Greece, or, they did, since the reports out of Greece always said that Greece was unqualified. The politicians of Germany and France would not accept that that was the answer though. The politicians felt that it was important to let Greece in no matter what. The "rules" where therefore altered again and again, and even though Eurostat clearly stated Greece was not qualified, they were let in.
There is in fact no reason to think that Greece lied, the rules were so muddled and riddled with exceptions etc that it is quite probable that the Greek ministry of finance actually thought they qualified. Perhaps they even did.
Some might bring up Goldman Sachs at this point and how they helped Greece hide about 2.8bn in debt, but that move is irrelevant since it occurred after Greece was admitted into the EUR.
It may be hard to understand, but in reality it is quite simple:
Greece never qualified for entry into the EUR. Ever. Eurostat said this again and again. The politicians of EU demanded, again and again, that Eurostat revise its numbers so that Greece would qualify. In other words, EU politicians were going to get Greece into the EUR no matter what. Greece also desired this, but so did France and Germany. To the extent that they eventually threw the rule book out and admitted Greece.
Side note - some will point to the Goldman Sachs situation where they "hid" EUR 2.8bn in Greek debt, which was a dubious move for sure, but it had no impact on Greece joining the EUR. People bring up this all the time, but it is in fact irrelevant. Greece had already been admitted into the EUR when Goldman Sachs pulled it's magic, and it had no impact on Greece being inside or outside of the EUR.
So, the non-qualified Greece is let into the EUR and things start going sideways quickly. Partly because the EUR is not a suitable currency for Greece, but also because the ide of the EUR is fundamentally retarded in the first place. You can have a single currency in an area with a single fiscal policy, a single central bank and (in effect) a single minister of finance. This means that you can have a single currency when you have a single foreign (and mostly domestic) political scene. In other words, Europe got it ass backwards. You can't use a single currency to create a cohesive singe federation with a single government, you can have a single currency after you have a single federation with a single (mostly) government. Europe is not ready for that solution, and probably won't be for at least a century.
Now, things are moving sideways in pear-shaped boats, and we hit the financial crisis of 2007-08. Basically, incapable of adjusting by using fiscal policies, Greece completely collapses. Given the above, this is inevitable, and the main cause of the collapse is that Greece has no real control over its fiscal policies - in other words, the Greek collapse is mainly caused by them being in the EUR and not having its own currency. Thanks to German and French politicians who wanted this despite the idiocy of it. Under pressure Greece begs for help. It doesn't get any. It's given loans. That's like giving new credit cards to a kid that has just over-drawn five of them. Its idiotic, moronic and seriously counter productive. It also comes with serious strings attached.
What does Germany do after Greece basically has collapsed and begged for help? They lend money to Greece, with strings attached. "You gotta buy three submarines from us". "You have to buy five frigates from France too". In other words, not only do EU do the decidedly moronic thing of lending Greece money, they also force Greece to spend up the wazoo with their new credit cards. This is not only unhelpful, it is basically tantamount to a declaration of war. The added debt is used to force Greece to sell of national assets to German and French companies. So the war makers are now getting their grubby hands on Greek property and national assets without firing a shot. Finally, by forcing Greece to take loans and implement austerity measures that are designed to ensure Greece can never grow its economy, Germany makes sure that there is no practical way Greece will forever be slaves to their European overlords.
This crisis was caused by Germany and France forcing Eurostat to "change the rules" to let Greece in. It was exacerbated by instead of helping out when the crisis hit, they made it worse by forcing more debt on Greece and forcing austerity measures that are designed to prevent economic growth.
Angela Markel is missing two personal features, a curiously stiff right arm and a silly little mustache, but other than that, she handles Greece in the way Germany always thought Greece should be handled. Angela is also using monetary measures rather than paratroops to terrorize the Greek citizenry, but that is a technicality.
Polygamy should certainly be legal. As to your other moronic examples, ask an adult to explain the concept of "consenting adults" to you.
Bzzzzzt! Wrong. Let me use an example. Marriage gives you certain rights and privileges if your partner is hospitalized or even dies. They have nothing to do with procreation at all. Also, they do not pertain to singles since singles have no.partners. You are hiding your bigotry behind your ignorance. Get educated!
Marriage is not, have never been and will never be a religious institution. Marriage is a legal, and ONLY a legal contract. You are confused.
Funny. An article on mass delusion that skips the biggest delusion of all, and perhaps the most damaging one: Christianity. Oh well...
Or, perhaps he"s not an English native with "only" a reasonable grasp of English while you are one of those ignorant, moronic Americans who thinks English is the only language used in the world. You know: The bible is written in English and if English was good enough for Jesus then it should be good enough for the Spanish. Retard!
In scientific language I believe what you are referring to is called "conjecture", but i might be wrong. A hypothesis must be falsifiavle.
You need to learn the difference between "is" and "I think it should be". Morality has less value, overall, than the dog shit I just stepped in. Want the litmus test? If you were right, your understanding of moral would have equal value to the moral of the leadership of the ISIL.
Apparently this thing will deliver about 2kW sustained when in use. What? My water heater draws 2.2kW. It wont even be able to serve me tea, and I'm not even British. My AC draws about 1.2kW. My iron draws more than my water cooker.
Sorry, this is, at this, and quite significantly lower, price point(s) is a joke.
A ten year old boy in Santa Monica has purchased a strawberry ice-cream with the intention to consume it instantly.
Moron.
The two main things that are limiting are that you can't take advantage of the unique strengths of the particular device you're running on
There was a reason I wanted specifics. This is a generic comment and it generally isn't particularly accurate anymore. Do you know of any specific things that would suffer on any specific platform?
performance always (and inevitably) suffers
Again, not specific, and generally extremely far from the truth. Yes, Javascript runs slower than native code, but that isn't necessarily an issue. It depends on what your app does. Many, many apps are not calculation heavy, they collect data from a back-end server, present it to the user, allow the user to alter the data in some ways and then send the data back to the server. Any slowness in such application will be caused, by network slowness in almost all cases. In other words, the performance of the underlying GUI language is mostly irrelevant as long as it is fast enough, and Javascript is, for a huge number of applications.
So, at this point in time you have not given any kind of arguments that supports your position.
Have you developed applications in Javascript that suffered performance wise? Have you developed any mobile applications that you assume would suffer performance wise?
It's easy to parrot the "wisdom" of others, that's why I asked you to be specific. You weren't.
Limiting - how. Please be specific or we can easily conclude you might not have as many clues as you think you do.
but a car is carbon neutral as well. It produces as much carbon as it consumes
You really need to share some of the drugs you are taking. They must be awesome. So, what kind of photosynthesis does a car do?
the addition of a forest where previously there was not is a carbon sink
Yes, for a little while. In the fastest growing period. Once the forest is somewhat established, the rotting processes etc in that forest will produce as much carbon as the forest consumes. Sure, the growth stage is semi-long in human terms, but it is both far too slow and far too inefficient to do anything about our current emissions.
As for cars, putting any kind of restrictions on cars to curb CO2 emissions is retarded, since personal transport constitutes a tiny part (4-5%) of the total CO2 emissions. Going electrical is retarded since the electricity used to drive the car is, in the end, produced by burning coal. None of the current efforts to curb CO2 emissions have any theoretical possibility of making a dent in CO2 emissions since they do not encourage, or enforce, a reduction in (or stopping of) the burning of coal.
Germany has gone to 30-40% electricity production using renewable energy. Still, their CO2 emissions have increased at exactly the same rate as the rest of the world. For two main reasons - 1/ The morons are shutting down nuclear plants, and 2/ when mixing renewable energy and fossil burning, the fossil burning becomes far less efficient and the CO2 emissions from coal and oil increases quite significantly.
If there's a lot of bad blood between you and would be contributors
There isn't. Remember, most of the world is not as closed minded and insane as the average slashdotter.
It really is best not to ignore social component even if the licence doesn't mention it
There was probably a full argument in there in your mind, but you only wrote about half of it.
It isn't. Have you been living in a cave for the past few years?
solar-powered green chemistry using sequestered carbon dioxide
Sorry to disappoint you. A forest is carbon neutral. It produces as much CO2 as it consumes. Your suggestion will have no impact on CO2 removed from the air.
100%. Why do you ask?
.NET is fluff? The C# compiler is fluff? What specifically does MS need to open for it not to be fluff? Windows? It's obviously a topic within Microsoft.
So, a fully open source .NET is not open? A fully open source compiler for .NET, that's not open? How do they make it more open?
Giving tools to developers for lock-in technologies
Yeah, you are right. They have only open-sourced .NET and it is now available on all major (and quite a few minor) platforms. They have open sourced the C# compiler. They have open sourced just about anything web related they are doing. So, what else should they open source? Windows? According to Microsoft that is apparently also an option they keep open.
What, specifically, are you missing?