The splitter is functionally equivalent to taking a measurement, you may not be extracting the information, but it is an interaction, and it's the interaction part of "taking a measurement" that changes it, not the information extraction/conversion into another form.
We know the splitter changes it, because its velocity changes... it leaves along a different vector.
When inflation is above interest, or you store money in a way which doesn't get interest, then yes, it does act as a stimulus by allowing spending of money that is otherwise not being spent. Unfortunately, the main spending of the US federal government is on its war machine... so the problem is what is done with the debt+inflation tax, not the fact that it exists.
You do also need income to at least rise at the rate of the inflation, and then it only hits money not being spent, but neoliberal policies are making that happen less and less, with the worst off seeing a decrease in real wages, a refusal to increase minimum wage being heavily responsible there.
Ugh, if he was a plant then part of his job would be to create impressions such as those, so you having those impressions and believing they mean anything shows that you probably shouldn't be calling other people "idiots".
The only relevant point is that his source code is open, so you don't HAVE to trust him. That's the whole point!!!
The missing bit though is that Foxconn are breaking laws... and it's not like China have tough labour laws, they give barely any protection to workers, but Foxconn are still managing to break the laws that are there. By extension of the laws that are broken in China producing these products, many laws also often get broken by the importation of those products into western countries.
Whether the local effect of "it's better than the alternatives" is true or not, the effect of allowing companies to operate under impunity holds people down. Disbanding Foxconn, I agree, is a bit too brute force an answer, but beginning to shut down factories that are breaking laws is a start, as this would incentivise them to bring other factories up to at least "legal" status. Apple can use their money to encourage this behavior also. Once factories are operating legally, the need for corruption disappears, and then you see the dragging-up effect on other local business standards who have to compete.
While investment instead is being directed at funding corruption to allow impunity, this dragging-up effect doesn't materialise, as to compete, you must also invest in corruption. If Apple paid more for products from factories that met their legal requirements, you would start to see improvement. This is not in Apple's perceived interest.
"Uh, yeah. That'll be why oil is over $100 a barrel"
No, it's not. Saudis say they would increase production if there was demand, but the truth is, there isn't. People aren't buying that much more oil, the price discovery mechanism breaks when more than 20-30% of movement on the market is speculators rather than receivers and users of the product. Traders have $1-2Trln that they're sitting on because they don't want to invest in such a rotten economy, meanwhile the massive FIs like JPMorganChase and Goldmann are desperately trying to recapitalise after losing so much money in the $8Trln housing bubble... they're doing it in the commodity futures markets, buying up food, buying up oil, buying up metals, pushing the price up so they can profit from the difference. Easy to do when you can borrow at next to nothing from the Fed (in fact the reason why JPMorgan merged with Chase Manhattan was so that they could borrow from the Fed, as only banks and bank holding companies can)
This has a bigger effect than one might realise. It's not solely responsibly, sure, but the effect shouldn't be underestimated.
Serves US goals... while they're pretending Iran is developing nukes, they can pretend the missile shield is being put in place for Iran, rather than for Russia/China as is really the case.
Purchasing of nuclear material was an argument that Bush used, even though Joseph Wilson, who had been sent out to track down this material found the claim to be completely false (and I've listened to his evidence, his case is solid). Wilson's report was ignored, so he went public, and so they destroyed his wife, Valerie's career as a CIA operative working to keep weapons out of the US. Libby, who IIRC was Cheney's Chief of Staff, went to prison for it, but even so, they sent a message loud and clear... when the administration is building a case for war, you do not challenge them, you keep any information showing that they are lying to yourself, or they will go after your family.
The message was received loud and clear.
I highly recommend anyone who doesn't know about the case to research it. Might change how well you can trust the case that's being built against Iran.
It would be natural for them to want the bomb... and many of their neighbours want them to have the bomb - if you ask the people that is, obviously governments don't want them to have the bomb, but as we know, governments are often not representative of the will of the people. Up until Obama, the US didn't invade countries with nukes, so getting them was the only protection a country could get from the threat of US invasion. This has, of course, changes slightly with Pakistan, but it's only civilians that Obama sends people and drones in to kill, they don't attack the state, which is why they've gotten away with it as much as they have.
What seems to be forgotten here though is that we have even less evidence of Iran developing a bomb than we did for Iraq having WMDs that erm... didn't exist. But I guess we're not supposed to talk about that. Let the news do its job and gear us up for the next war, ay.
"They have been a major threat to the US [...] Korean war... Vietnam... Afghanistan... Pakistan"
You do realise none of those places are actually the US, don't you? Let's be clear here, what we're talking about is multiple countries fighting each other in order to gain exclusivity over the exploitation of local resources and populations. China may be a threat to the US's ability to take what they want, just as the US was to Britain last century, but the US was never a threat to Britain, just as China isn't a threat to the US. Truth is America's biggest threats are internal - the paralysis of the government means it's not able to effectively govern. It could set sane trade policies that would remove China's ability to compete, but US corporations are making too much money selling to US consumers products that they make in China, changing trade policies would mean US corporations would have to move jobs BACK to the United States, which means paying people non-slave-wages to make stuff, eating into their profits. This is not in their short term interests... it's in their long term interests, but in the days of instant stock trading, companies don't get to act in their long term interests.
The only real threat to America is America. Country refuses to adapt, and we all know from our evolution classes what happens when things don't adapt.
The rest of the world... well yeah, the big players have always fought to share that amongst themselves.
It's not very common but it's not unheard of, the condition's known as monophobia, which you may know already, and yes it does sound like she had it bad, possibly to the extent that it would have had an effect on her health, as persistent worrying does, increasing the chance of something like that happening. I've seen similar anxiety disorders, both self-directed or externally-directed, such as a mother who was convinced her baby wouldn't wake up again if she didn't sing a certain song to him going to sleep. The thought processes that lead to that belief are complex to say the least. One of the difficult things with a fear like that is that it is self preserving, because getting rid of the fear would expose the chance of that thing happening (eg, if she stopped thinking that she needed to sing that song for her child to ever wake up again, then she would stop, which would lead to loss of her child) which results in the putting up of defenses against having the fear dealt with, which you obviously saw first hand.
And yes these things can be very acute, and I imagine can form like synesthesias, where a crossover between two unrelated concepts forms, so the number 7 might always appear yellow. While less common, there's no reason why these can't form with higher function concepts, like the idea of being alone and the idea of personal danger. Of course, there's so many different concepts within our brains that there's a massive number of combinations of things that could result from the same thing happening... and when it is acute, the person, being otherwise of complete rational mindedness, just finds ways of dealing with that thing, or avoiding it, while living otherwise as any other "normal" person would do.
Is always good to see occasions where the saying "have you ever noticed that the less someone knows, the louder they know it?" is shown to not always be true, that sometimes, the knowledgeable can be noisy too:-)
I doubt anyone can code an algorithm sophisticated enough to tell whether is person is legally a child or not, let alone whether that person is being abused or not... even if these people decide it would be good to go ahead with such an idea, when they discover that what they want to do is actually impossible, the whole thing will disappear back into the void from whence it came anyway, just like every other time somebody who doesn't understand computers thinks they can be simply made to do things that are impossible (or at least not possible for the foreseeable future)
No they do not! Commies, brown people and the poor aren't "living", they're simply targets to be destroyed, and if you disagree you must be a commie, brown, or poor.
I find it anything BUT depressing! Is nice to know that no one's too big to be able to just throw their weight around, do whatever the hell they like, and be completely invulnerable to retaliation while doing so. Okay, liberating a gig of data isn't much in the way of retaliation, it doesn't exactly remove their ability to wage war, so accomplishment is between little to none, but even so, getting all depressed that Goliath is even vulnerable to stones seems to be a little divorced from reality really.
Spending? You mean printing, surely? The problem the Americans have got is that dollars aren't circulating, corps 'n financial institutions are hoarding trillians in dollars and other assets, and as wealth only adds to an economy when it changes hands, the more that gets hoarded, the less that can happen. That's why economically successful countries like Germany have high upper band tax rates, as it encourages investment as a means of tax evasion... without the high tax rate, people are more willing to pay themselves stupidly high rates, hoarding wealth and slowing down the economy.
I think you're reading what I said the way you want to. Fact of the matter is that the way Israel has behaved has been appauling, and that is a fact. Morality does not work on a 'lowest common denominator' basis, the actions of others is NOT a defence for the immorality of the actions of oneself. As it's not a defence, it must be a deflection, and I am not going to play that game with you.
"why would you say "Israel" in scare quotes and say you feel dirty but not "Syria" as well?"
Your deflection is most disingenuous. I can't put a word in quotes in I didn't even use that word, can I? So your problem is that I talked about one country, and you think that I can only talk about one country if I talk about every other country in the world as well, otherwise it's "not fair"... gonna complain that I haven't talked about Egypt or Jordan as well? Well I'm flattered that an opinion of mine isn't enough and you just need to hear more from me about surrounding areas as well, but I do suggest instead that you grow up.
I would say the USA was taken over rather than occupied... occupied implies that the previous inhabitants were left alive, and that's hardly the case. And no, I'm not an American, nor would I want to visit such a country.
I do also know that "negotiate" has a rather special meaning for Israel.
Oh no, I must have read part of it and missed a couple of words, I'm sorry for not going back and checking the exact bits that I must have read... oh wait, no I'm not.
My concern is of the mistreatment of people, wherever that may be. I think the way the land was just divided up was wrong, but mostly because of that primary concern: the way people were treated by the process.
Wow, you really need things spelt out for you huh.
Slashdot Mirror
The splitter is functionally equivalent to taking a measurement, you may not be extracting the information, but it is an interaction, and it's the interaction part of "taking a measurement" that changes it, not the information extraction/conversion into another form.
We know the splitter changes it, because its velocity changes... it leaves along a different vector.
When inflation is above interest, or you store money in a way which doesn't get interest, then yes, it does act as a stimulus by allowing spending of money that is otherwise not being spent. Unfortunately, the main spending of the US federal government is on its war machine... so the problem is what is done with the debt+inflation tax, not the fact that it exists.
You do also need income to at least rise at the rate of the inflation, and then it only hits money not being spent, but neoliberal policies are making that happen less and less, with the worst off seeing a decrease in real wages, a refusal to increase minimum wage being heavily responsible there.
The powerful don't want to see inflation, it makes their money worth less.,
So what makes them so sure that only Windows machines were targeted?
Um... as it says, the exploit code is Windows specific... IOW, the code which collects the hostname and MAC address will be using Windows API calls.
They probably would have spotted if the exploit bundled WINE!
Ugh, if he was a plant then part of his job would be to create impressions such as those, so you having those impressions and believing they mean anything shows that you probably shouldn't be calling other people "idiots".
The only relevant point is that his source code is open, so you don't HAVE to trust him. That's the whole point!!!
The missing bit though is that Foxconn are breaking laws... and it's not like China have tough labour laws, they give barely any protection to workers, but Foxconn are still managing to break the laws that are there. By extension of the laws that are broken in China producing these products, many laws also often get broken by the importation of those products into western countries.
Whether the local effect of "it's better than the alternatives" is true or not, the effect of allowing companies to operate under impunity holds people down. Disbanding Foxconn, I agree, is a bit too brute force an answer, but beginning to shut down factories that are breaking laws is a start, as this would incentivise them to bring other factories up to at least "legal" status. Apple can use their money to encourage this behavior also. Once factories are operating legally, the need for corruption disappears, and then you see the dragging-up effect on other local business standards who have to compete.
While investment instead is being directed at funding corruption to allow impunity, this dragging-up effect doesn't materialise, as to compete, you must also invest in corruption. If Apple paid more for products from factories that met their legal requirements, you would start to see improvement. This is not in Apple's perceived interest.
"Uh, yeah. That'll be why oil is over $100 a barrel"
No, it's not. Saudis say they would increase production if there was demand, but the truth is, there isn't. People aren't buying that much more oil, the price discovery mechanism breaks when more than 20-30% of movement on the market is speculators rather than receivers and users of the product. Traders have $1-2Trln that they're sitting on because they don't want to invest in such a rotten economy, meanwhile the massive FIs like JPMorganChase and Goldmann are desperately trying to recapitalise after losing so much money in the $8Trln housing bubble... they're doing it in the commodity futures markets, buying up food, buying up oil, buying up metals, pushing the price up so they can profit from the difference. Easy to do when you can borrow at next to nothing from the Fed (in fact the reason why JPMorgan merged with Chase Manhattan was so that they could borrow from the Fed, as only banks and bank holding companies can)
This has a bigger effect than one might realise. It's not solely responsibly, sure, but the effect shouldn't be underestimated.
Serves US goals... while they're pretending Iran is developing nukes, they can pretend the missile shield is being put in place for Iran, rather than for Russia/China as is really the case.
"...over what we all know Iran is actually doing"
How do you know? Because the news told you and you believe them?
"Hussein had plans for nukes"
Purchasing of nuclear material was an argument that Bush used, even though Joseph Wilson, who had been sent out to track down this material found the claim to be completely false (and I've listened to his evidence, his case is solid). Wilson's report was ignored, so he went public, and so they destroyed his wife, Valerie's career as a CIA operative working to keep weapons out of the US. Libby, who IIRC was Cheney's Chief of Staff, went to prison for it, but even so, they sent a message loud and clear... when the administration is building a case for war, you do not challenge them, you keep any information showing that they are lying to yourself, or they will go after your family.
The message was received loud and clear.
I highly recommend anyone who doesn't know about the case to research it. Might change how well you can trust the case that's being built against Iran.
It would be natural for them to want the bomb... and many of their neighbours want them to have the bomb - if you ask the people that is, obviously governments don't want them to have the bomb, but as we know, governments are often not representative of the will of the people. Up until Obama, the US didn't invade countries with nukes, so getting them was the only protection a country could get from the threat of US invasion. This has, of course, changes slightly with Pakistan, but it's only civilians that Obama sends people and drones in to kill, they don't attack the state, which is why they've gotten away with it as much as they have.
What seems to be forgotten here though is that we have even less evidence of Iran developing a bomb than we did for Iraq having WMDs that erm... didn't exist. But I guess we're not supposed to talk about that. Let the news do its job and gear us up for the next war, ay.
I thought international relations were based on not remembering anything?
"Honestly, I think we should have "liberated" Iran instead of Iraq"
Yeah, last intervention in Iran worked out really well, didn't lead to them getting an even worse government or anything.
"They have been a major threat to the US [...] Korean war ... Vietnam ... Afghanistan ... Pakistan"
You do realise none of those places are actually the US, don't you? Let's be clear here, what we're talking about is multiple countries fighting each other in order to gain exclusivity over the exploitation of local resources and populations. China may be a threat to the US's ability to take what they want, just as the US was to Britain last century, but the US was never a threat to Britain, just as China isn't a threat to the US. Truth is America's biggest threats are internal - the paralysis of the government means it's not able to effectively govern. It could set sane trade policies that would remove China's ability to compete, but US corporations are making too much money selling to US consumers products that they make in China, changing trade policies would mean US corporations would have to move jobs BACK to the United States, which means paying people non-slave-wages to make stuff, eating into their profits. This is not in their short term interests... it's in their long term interests, but in the days of instant stock trading, companies don't get to act in their long term interests.
The only real threat to America is America. Country refuses to adapt, and we all know from our evolution classes what happens when things don't adapt.
The rest of the world... well yeah, the big players have always fought to share that amongst themselves.
It's not very common but it's not unheard of, the condition's known as monophobia, which you may know already, and yes it does sound like she had it bad, possibly to the extent that it would have had an effect on her health, as persistent worrying does, increasing the chance of something like that happening. I've seen similar anxiety disorders, both self-directed or externally-directed, such as a mother who was convinced her baby wouldn't wake up again if she didn't sing a certain song to him going to sleep. The thought processes that lead to that belief are complex to say the least. One of the difficult things with a fear like that is that it is self preserving, because getting rid of the fear would expose the chance of that thing happening (eg, if she stopped thinking that she needed to sing that song for her child to ever wake up again, then she would stop, which would lead to loss of her child) which results in the putting up of defenses against having the fear dealt with, which you obviously saw first hand.
And yes these things can be very acute, and I imagine can form like synesthesias, where a crossover between two unrelated concepts forms, so the number 7 might always appear yellow. While less common, there's no reason why these can't form with higher function concepts, like the idea of being alone and the idea of personal danger. Of course, there's so many different concepts within our brains that there's a massive number of combinations of things that could result from the same thing happening... and when it is acute, the person, being otherwise of complete rational mindedness, just finds ways of dealing with that thing, or avoiding it, while living otherwise as any other "normal" person would do.
Lead by example ;-)
Is always good to see occasions where the saying "have you ever noticed that the less someone knows, the louder they know it?" is shown to not always be true, that sometimes, the knowledgeable can be noisy too :-)
I doubt anyone can code an algorithm sophisticated enough to tell whether is person is legally a child or not, let alone whether that person is being abused or not... even if these people decide it would be good to go ahead with such an idea, when they discover that what they want to do is actually impossible, the whole thing will disappear back into the void from whence it came anyway, just like every other time somebody who doesn't understand computers thinks they can be simply made to do things that are impossible (or at least not possible for the foreseeable future)
No they do not! Commies, brown people and the poor aren't "living", they're simply targets to be destroyed, and if you disagree you must be a commie, brown, or poor.
I find it anything BUT depressing! Is nice to know that no one's too big to be able to just throw their weight around, do whatever the hell they like, and be completely invulnerable to retaliation while doing so. Okay, liberating a gig of data isn't much in the way of retaliation, it doesn't exactly remove their ability to wage war, so accomplishment is between little to none, but even so, getting all depressed that Goliath is even vulnerable to stones seems to be a little divorced from reality really.
Spending? You mean printing, surely? The problem the Americans have got is that dollars aren't circulating, corps 'n financial institutions are hoarding trillians in dollars and other assets, and as wealth only adds to an economy when it changes hands, the more that gets hoarded, the less that can happen. That's why economically successful countries like Germany have high upper band tax rates, as it encourages investment as a means of tax evasion... without the high tax rate, people are more willing to pay themselves stupidly high rates, hoarding wealth and slowing down the economy.
I think you're reading what I said the way you want to. Fact of the matter is that the way Israel has behaved has been appauling, and that is a fact. Morality does not work on a 'lowest common denominator' basis, the actions of others is NOT a defence for the immorality of the actions of oneself. As it's not a defence, it must be a deflection, and I am not going to play that game with you.
"why would you say "Israel" in scare quotes and say you feel dirty but not "Syria" as well?"
Your deflection is most disingenuous. I can't put a word in quotes in I didn't even use that word, can I? So your problem is that I talked about one country, and you think that I can only talk about one country if I talk about every other country in the world as well, otherwise it's "not fair"... gonna complain that I haven't talked about Egypt or Jordan as well? Well I'm flattered that an opinion of mine isn't enough and you just need to hear more from me about surrounding areas as well, but I do suggest instead that you grow up.
I would say the USA was taken over rather than occupied... occupied implies that the previous inhabitants were left alive, and that's hardly the case. And no, I'm not an American, nor would I want to visit such a country.
I do also know that "negotiate" has a rather special meaning for Israel.
Oh no, I must have read part of it and missed a couple of words, I'm sorry for not going back and checking the exact bits that I must have read... oh wait, no I'm not.
My concern is of the mistreatment of people, wherever that may be. I think the way the land was just divided up was wrong, but mostly because of that primary concern: the way people were treated by the process.
Wow, you really need things spelt out for you huh.