You're destroying wealth and creating more debt. That sure is an "insightful" thing to do when the US is already ridiculously over its head in debt, both at the macro and micro levels.
Gee, I just can't wait to bail out more fucksticks who now added a $8-15k loan to their debt load _and_ pay more in taxes to make up the money I gave them for this "stimulus plan".
I'm nearly at a local max for the amount of stupidity I can withstand any more.
The bigger problem is the stupidity of your argument. The top X percent, for _any_ value of X pay far more as a percent of their income in taxes than the bottom 100-X percent. This trend has only _increased_ over time. It's just that the value of X is getting slightly bigger now.
I guess if you're stupid you think it's a good idea on any level to have a vast majority of voters be non-taxpayers. I'm not stupid, so I know what that means. You clearly don't.
Don't be silly. The cost to buy a car and the interest paid on the loan will take a long, long time to recoup. This creates a negative change in disposable income. Now instead of e.g. $200 a month in gas you have $120 a month in gas and a $250 car loan.
Lol. Yeah, because the lifetime of a Prius is well established at 11.5 years because of all that data on 10 year old Priuses. And that vague handwaving/guess gesture to come up with the BTUs to product a Prius are so accurate.
Yeah, it's sad that you don't see they are bribing someone else with it. Where do you think the money for this is going to come from? Trees? And for all these other programs? You don't believe the laughable lie that we can tax the "rich fat cats" to get it all, right? Even Obama and his cronies are starting to lube us up and put it in slowly by telling us "well, OK, we may have to raise taxes on middle class".
You haven't reduced your carbon footprint and won't unless you drive your new car for, say, 20 years. In fact you've just bought into a scam. You do understand that it cost a lot of your precious "carbon" to make your new car, right?
And don't get me wrong, I'm global warming agnostic. Not sure either way, but it doesn't matter as pollution is unhealthy and damaging regardless of climate change. In the end, the cost to manufacture your new car far outweighs the savings in gas from a _sunk_ amount of pollution used to make your old car.
It's like people who think they need to eat that last 1/4 of a steak because they paid $50 for it. Well, I hate to tell you this but you already spent the $50, eating the rest will just make you sick.
This is a stupid program. In your case you might have bought one in the next year or two anyway, but the economic stimulus part is nonsense. It would be better to have consumers spend on something we _need_ than to destroy something of value and do make-work.
They didn't underestimate anything. They lied. Obama is a huge liar. Every number they come out with is a gross "underestimation". That lying asshole is claiming he's somehow going to "save" us money with a monster health program. And that he's not going to tax the middle class. And that he won't tax our health benefits. And that he may cost us more for the next few years but that our deficit will be _less_ in 10 years (right). They lie on even short term stuff, like unemployment figures. Lies, lies, lies.
So far his lies are less in stature compared to Dubya's giant lies, but they far, far outnumber Bush's.
Oh bullshit. That's like claiming that because astronomers use the scientific method that Astrology is really some hard core science too.
The GP's point is that the vast majority of the BULLSHIT that comes out under cover of being "psychology" or "sociology" is just that - bullshit. The hard sciences, like neuroscience and statistical analysis of sociological factors are certainly real science, but even those are wildly abused to come up with unscientific conclusions.
It will only overtake proprietary software in relatively static segments. Anything that's fast moving will be dominated by commercial software because commercial developers are, you know, paid? To work?
You do understand 99% of Microsoft employees don't initiate lawsuits or do whatever make-believe evil shit you nuts blame on MS, right?
I don't work for MS but for another company sometimes whined about, and let me say in return I hope your company loses sales and goes out of business and you lose your job and then you and your family lose your home.
Oh whaaa. You're begging the question. Microsoft should never have been in court in the first place.
Our monopoly laws were designed in the time of Standard Oil and US Steel. They controlled physically limited resources. Microsoft created something, and they sell it to willing participants in a free market where they have dozens of alternatives.
The fact is you have an irrational hatred of Microsoft for defending itself in court from baseless and irrational charges. Then you have the gall to pretend to be "socially enlightened" for this hatred when in fact you hate MS for the same reason all of you Linux nerds hate MS - they are a barrier to your socialist utopia where two legs are just as good as four and everyone is a linux nerd and the evil Microsoft has gone the way of the dinosaur.
You're clueless. Google's vision is a standardized "browser" running web apps. It's not some shitty mobile browser developed by Apple that will only run one thing at a time, not in the background.
Your original post, to which GP replied, was some wierd accusation of how CRAZY it was that google complained they couldn't write a native app but had to write a webapp. What's stupid about your original post is that Google must do this because Apples web app execution environment is limited and sucky.
I don't understand how the biggest, douchiest "open source" advocates who whine about DRM to no end are such huge Apple fans when the iPhone is the most CLOSED mobile system on the planet. It's just dumbfounding. I can't write my OWN FUCKING apps that run on the iPhone. It's astonishing to me, really.
Oh boo hoo. Listen to you cry. The true whining of a late-20th/early-21st century technosocialist. Jesus it's going to be a long first few decades of the 21st century waiting for the failed socialist policies of the EU member states to come crashing down before people realize (yet again) that socialism just doesn't work.
Stop lying. The fact that they have been labeled a monopoly does not mean they can't do the same fucking thing other companies do. This idea that Microsoft can't follow basic, accepted business practices that other companies do like including a browser with the OS they sell is a disgusting perversion, Yet you Linux windbags trot it out every time someone asks why it's OK for every other OS to include a browser but not Microsoft.
Unless it's applied to physically limited resources which pose grave societal danger, monopoly laws as interpreted nowadays are fundamentally stupid. But I'll play along and pretend they're internally consistent. You would have a rule like "MS can't threaten to hack up an OEMs prices because they sell non MS OS's." or "MS can't threaten to buy a competitor's company and spend a ton of funding to ruin an OEM who won't agree to enter in to some business deal".
Those would be the kinds of things a monopoly can't do. Telling someone they can't do something _every other vendor_ does is stupid. It's just thinly veiled socialism - when someone excels, hamstring them so everyone else can compete
Yeah. They'll need to audit transparency of the icons, attractiveness, icon size, order, spacing between them (wouldn't want to let them offer IE first, then 10 pages lower show Firefox and other choices), the textual description of the browsers' capabilities to ensure IE doesn't sound overly attractive, etc...
Almost right. They'd still want to sell to the EU countries. Just shut down all operations and make sure any Microsoft money goes entirely from the EU to Microsoft. So no research groups, development sites, anything - fire them all and close up shop in the EU other than sales offices.
Someone on another forum brought this up. Microsoft should offer a list of about 100 browsers in the EU version of Windows. Literally 100. Put IE first and then put the rest in random order.
Then tell the EU to put that in their pipes and smoke on it.
Slashdot Mirror
You're destroying wealth and creating more debt. That sure is an "insightful" thing to do when the US is already ridiculously over its head in debt, both at the macro and micro levels.
Gee, I just can't wait to bail out more fucksticks who now added a $8-15k loan to their debt load _and_ pay more in taxes to make up the money I gave them for this "stimulus plan".
I'm nearly at a local max for the amount of stupidity I can withstand any more.
The bigger problem is the stupidity of your argument. The top X percent, for _any_ value of X pay far more as a percent of their income in taxes than the bottom 100-X percent. This trend has only _increased_ over time. It's just that the value of X is getting slightly bigger now.
I guess if you're stupid you think it's a good idea on any level to have a vast majority of voters be non-taxpayers. I'm not stupid, so I know what that means. You clearly don't.
Don't be silly. The cost to buy a car and the interest paid on the loan will take a long, long time to recoup. This creates a negative change in disposable income. Now instead of e.g. $200 a month in gas you have $120 a month in gas and a $250 car loan.
Lol. Yeah, because the lifetime of a Prius is well established at 11.5 years because of all that data on 10 year old Priuses. And that vague handwaving/guess gesture to come up with the BTUs to product a Prius are so accurate.
Yeah, it's sad that you don't see they are bribing someone else with it. Where do you think the money for this is going to come from? Trees? And for all these other programs? You don't believe the laughable lie that we can tax the "rich fat cats" to get it all, right? Even Obama and his cronies are starting to lube us up and put it in slowly by telling us "well, OK, we may have to raise taxes on middle class".
You haven't reduced your carbon footprint and won't unless you drive your new car for, say, 20 years. In fact you've just bought into a scam. You do understand that it cost a lot of your precious "carbon" to make your new car, right?
And don't get me wrong, I'm global warming agnostic. Not sure either way, but it doesn't matter as pollution is unhealthy and damaging regardless of climate change. In the end, the cost to manufacture your new car far outweighs the savings in gas from a _sunk_ amount of pollution used to make your old car.
It's like people who think they need to eat that last 1/4 of a steak because they paid $50 for it. Well, I hate to tell you this but you already spent the $50, eating the rest will just make you sick.
This is a stupid program. In your case you might have bought one in the next year or two anyway, but the economic stimulus part is nonsense. It would be better to have consumers spend on something we _need_ than to destroy something of value and do make-work.
They didn't underestimate anything. They lied. Obama is a huge liar. Every number they come out with is a gross "underestimation". That lying asshole is claiming he's somehow going to "save" us money with a monster health program. And that he's not going to tax the middle class. And that he won't tax our health benefits. And that he may cost us more for the next few years but that our deficit will be _less_ in 10 years (right). They lie on even short term stuff, like unemployment figures. Lies, lies, lies.
So far his lies are less in stature compared to Dubya's giant lies, but they far, far outnumber Bush's.
The best way to fuck up their program is buy German or Korean. Hyundai for me, bitches.
Oh bullshit. That's like claiming that because astronomers use the scientific method that Astrology is really some hard core science too.
The GP's point is that the vast majority of the BULLSHIT that comes out under cover of being "psychology" or "sociology" is just that - bullshit. The hard sciences, like neuroscience and statistical analysis of sociological factors are certainly real science, but even those are wildly abused to come up with unscientific conclusions.
Meh.. Just post anonymously, using Tor.
It only means this by some retarded, angry socialist interpretation of the laws.
It will only overtake proprietary software in relatively static segments. Anything that's fast moving will be dominated by commercial software because commercial developers are, you know, paid? To work?
You do understand 99% of Microsoft employees don't initiate lawsuits or do whatever make-believe evil shit you nuts blame on MS, right?
I don't work for MS but for another company sometimes whined about, and let me say in return I hope your company loses sales and goes out of business and you lose your job and then you and your family lose your home.
Like that?
Oh whaaa. You're begging the question. Microsoft should never have been in court in the first place.
Our monopoly laws were designed in the time of Standard Oil and US Steel. They controlled physically limited resources. Microsoft created something, and they sell it to willing participants in a free market where they have dozens of alternatives.
The fact is you have an irrational hatred of Microsoft for defending itself in court from baseless and irrational charges. Then you have the gall to pretend to be "socially enlightened" for this hatred when in fact you hate MS for the same reason all of you Linux nerds hate MS - they are a barrier to your socialist utopia where two legs are just as good as four and everyone is a linux nerd and the evil Microsoft has gone the way of the dinosaur.
You're clueless. Google's vision is a standardized "browser" running web apps. It's not some shitty mobile browser developed by Apple that will only run one thing at a time, not in the background.
Your original post, to which GP replied, was some wierd accusation of how CRAZY it was that google complained they couldn't write a native app but had to write a webapp. What's stupid about your original post is that Google must do this because Apples web app execution environment is limited and sucky.
I don't understand how the biggest, douchiest "open source" advocates who whine about DRM to no end are such huge Apple fans when the iPhone is the most CLOSED mobile system on the planet. It's just dumbfounding. I can't write my OWN FUCKING apps that run on the iPhone. It's astonishing to me, really.
Oh boo hoo. Listen to you cry. The true whining of a late-20th/early-21st century technosocialist. Jesus it's going to be a long first few decades of the 21st century waiting for the failed socialist policies of the EU member states to come crashing down before people realize (yet again) that socialism just doesn't work.
I have a question. Are you a time traveler from 1860?
Seriously - wtf kind of retarded rules are these? Do they think you can't duplicate or alter a bound book? Guh?
Stop lying. The fact that they have been labeled a monopoly does not mean they can't do the same fucking thing other companies do. This idea that Microsoft can't follow basic, accepted business practices that other companies do like including a browser with the OS they sell is a disgusting perversion, Yet you Linux windbags trot it out every time someone asks why it's OK for every other OS to include a browser but not Microsoft.
Unless it's applied to physically limited resources which pose grave societal danger, monopoly laws as interpreted nowadays are fundamentally stupid. But I'll play along and pretend they're internally consistent. You would have a rule like "MS can't threaten to hack up an OEMs prices because they sell non MS OS's." or "MS can't threaten to buy a competitor's company and spend a ton of funding to ruin an OEM who won't agree to enter in to some business deal".
Those would be the kinds of things a monopoly can't do. Telling someone they can't do something _every other vendor_ does is stupid. It's just thinly veiled socialism - when someone excels, hamstring them so everyone else can compete
Yeah. They'll need to audit transparency of the icons, attractiveness, icon size, order, spacing between them (wouldn't want to let them offer IE first, then 10 pages lower show Firefox and other choices), the textual description of the browsers' capabilities to ensure IE doesn't sound overly attractive, etc...
It's like a bureaucrat's wet dream!
You can find ~30 of them with a simple google search. You can probably find another 20 with some obscure poking around.
OK, you may need to write the other 50 as per Rockoon's post.
50 (or even 30) would be fine, though. Main goal is to not reward the people who instigated the witch hunt. Make Opera compete with a port of IceCat.
Want to bet?
Almost right. They'd still want to sell to the EU countries. Just shut down all operations and make sure any Microsoft money goes entirely from the EU to Microsoft. So no research groups, development sites, anything - fire them all and close up shop in the EU other than sales offices.
Someone on another forum brought this up. Microsoft should offer a list of about 100 browsers in the EU version of Windows. Literally 100. Put IE first and then put the rest in random order.
Then tell the EU to put that in their pipes and smoke on it.
Good god. The whole thing is ridiculous in the first place, now you're going to measure the fucking icons?