They haven't been committed. They extend for an uncertain time horizon.
Additionally, the externalities you're talking about, are generally due to the socialization of some other service.
So you've 1 of 2 directions, you regulate, and increase taxation, and regulation, ad infinum, or you deregulate, and decrease taxation, and deregulate, ad infinum. Resulting in minimal (or no) government or huge government.
However, thank you for trivializing the field of economics.
I'm from Adelaide also (was the guy who posted the story). To me teenager has always been between 10 and 20 (or 18, maybe), so no idea why people are nutting out over them being called teenagers.
What were they doing in a storm drain, you ask. Did you notice where it happened? Hackam. Probably Hackam West. So, to answer your question. What were they doing in a storm drain? Probably trying to get out of Hackam! I know I'd pick a storm drain over Hackam anyday!:-)
Nah, I got it mixed up, after reading what the other guy said, he was talking about some ECM that was in heavy use for a while. I got mixed up. Which makes sense since I remember something about AWACS.
Also, he didn't shoot SAM's at fighters for real, mainly just at trailing targets in war games. Though he accidentally locked on to the plane trailing the target once, but aborted in time.
Either way, one good thing was that even with America's awesomeness we still did really well, in fact, often flawless in these war games.
I'm not so sure about the Australian Over THe Horizon radar being unable to be used by SAM's for targeting.
My uncle used to be SAM commander (or whatever it's called) and he said there were plenty of times when they would lock on and fire at aircraft way over the horizon, when engaging in war games with the US. This was despite AWACS and similar.
Though he did say that most of these were with active radar, however when they (the US) started running stealth fighters in the games, they weren't able to track them. However, almost straight away all of the SAM sites were quickly sent down to the DSTO for upgrades, and each one came back with a special little switch which they would flick when ever certain conditions were met. He surmised that this allowed them to track and lock on aircraft using stealth technology using the OTH system.
They get taught about every single switch, how it works and what it does, so that they can fully understand the system, and ensure that it operates no matter what, or can recognize when somethings wrong. However, when this new switch was installed, it was kept quiet, they weren't told anything but "When this happens. Flick this.", and so they did, and from then on it was able to track and lock on any of these stealth fighters.
I could have my information wrong, but it sounds valid to me. I'd be interested to hear if anyone knows any details or has any other information on this system.
It's also isn't that we don't necessarily don't understand it, it's that our calculations have to come from summary data, which is spurious at best. Just ask anyone who studies statistics.
Calculating a summary, from a summary of a summary, to generate your answer, often leaves a lot of data incorrectly weighted and information hidden.
We'll never be able to know for certain, because we'll never be able to get enough information, in a timely enough fashion. We just calculate probabilities, hope we don't have holes in our logic, and do what we believe is right.
You'd be surprised exactly how much Government is in some business, especially those which are done for cultural benefit (like sports) where the subsidies come with strings attached.
Though, if it were a completely free business, then it should have the right to discriminate anyway it wants (Race, Gender, Sexuality, etc) as long as the people were voluntarily (Negative liberty wise) subjecting themselves to it.
Not that there necessarily is a connection between the business and the government in this situation, but the reason the lines are blurred and some people (such as yourself) don't see these sorts of connections are due to how people aren't willing to relinquish control of these organizations, which means there almost always is a connection, though for some businesses it's far less.
For instance:
Do you really want to pay (through taxation) for a business which doesn't treat people "equally"? (The former point)
Do you really want to let (through regulation) a business discriminate the way it wants? (The latter point)
I've got a feeling you don't like either of these situations. Where as libertarians don't like the former (since it involves Government taking money) but have no problem with the latter (since they understand the market will take care of that business).
Yeah, I hear that, as I read through the article I found myself realizing that I wasn't aligning with any one party.
Half the questions I was aligned with the democrats. Half the questions I was aligned with the republicans. And the other half I thought... This question isn't clear, nor is there a real libertarian answer.
So out of 150% of the questions, I barely aligned with anyone.
When I was a teenager, 8 years ago (2001-2002), instead of putting a CD deck in my car, I wanted to put my dad's old 8 track deck into my car. That way it would have been ironic, hip, and would have limited me to playing only his old 60s-80s 8 track tapes. Also, I had no money for a CD deck. Almost got it done, but lazy kicked in, and the 8 track deck needed to be repaired a bit, so I abandoned it.
I went around trying to find somewhere which might have one for real cheap, like a pawn shop or similar. This was a pretty interesting thing to go around asking.
I went into this kind of music pawn shop, which had heaps of old things, including old record players, however it was more focused on that sort of indie niche. I walked in and asked the person running the store if they have an 8 track player, especially for a car. There was this old druggie raver looking guy standing behind him looking at records. When I asked about the 8 track player, he turned around and said "Hey man, that was funny, I thought I heard you asking for an 8 track player", at which point I looked at him and said "I am", he looked back with a freaked out yet blank face and said "Whoah". He then proceeded to stare at me after that last thought. All I can think was that I caused him to have some sort of an acid flash back, which he experienced for the next 30 seconds.
Either way, I still got a pile of 8 track tapes and no 8 track player. Probably for the best, I now have a good car, with a good deck, and I like things which aren't shit, now. Though the old bomb (1981 Ford Falcon XD) was awesome for jumping over train tracks, going 200kph, drifting around dirt corners, shredding my tyres and similar.
Yeah, we can ban them, and then they can drive without a license, where they don't have to sit exams or ludicrous "testing... to ensure that their driving remains at a good standard".
You can't regulate safety, it doesn't work, so don't try. Voluntarily educate, that's the best you can do.
This is true. However, fatal accidents are mostly caused through excessive speed.
This is why they are so insane about it... because every life is precious!
The flaw in their logic however, is people who speed, are doing it with or without these limits. So they are attempting to throw millions of dollars, crazy regulations, and insane ideas, to reduce a few deaths. Australia has 21 million people and in April there were 151 deaths on the road (source). Which, though tragic, is a small amount of deaths, which won't be reduced, no matter what you do. Though these numbers will deviate heaps, as they aren't predictable, and in every incidents, they were accidents and nobody meant for it to happen.
In fact, there has been a correlation between speed limits and increased speeds, such that because it's more predictable, you can go faster, so you do. If there were no speed limits, it's less predictable, so you go slower where it's unsafe and faster where it is safe. Which is what people tend to do at the moment (with the speed limits), however they undervalue the probability of a crash because of the sign.
Similarly shared space, less signs, less laws, creates a safer environment by ensuring people understand how unsafe and unpredictable the environment is.
I'd like to see more of this, especially in Australia where we have speed limit signs, suggested limit signs, wild life signs, town signs, warning signs, slipery when wet signs, picture of the upcoming road signs, and similar.
I find that I all but block out those signs these days, as the time it takes to recognize and process them, the information becomes irelevant, or the information they have is so lowest common denominator that if I drove like that, I would be more dangerous as other people would come up behind me fast, wondering why I'm going so slow.
However, I contend that the worst thing is the propiganda that we have to watch. Where the government shows us in the most graphically violent way possible that their signs need to be obeyed. They do this while trying to censor our internet, and restrict violent movies (just a few) from being imported.
Yeah, it's also really distracting to have to pay attention to what the speed is.
There are many roads in Australia, where in the space of a kilometer or two, the speed limits can change as such... 80, 70, 60, 50, 60, 80, 60, 50, 25, 60.
This is also where they put the speed cameras, as it's easier to meet their quota's (yes they have quota's).
So these areas, you end up paying attention to the side of the road, as opposed to the road. So you're distracted, which causes most accidents (not most fatal accidents, but most accidents).
If you're worried about the consequences not being made worse, this is a ridiculous argument as the law is already flexible enough to account for wreckless endangerment.
Telnet doesn't work very well, you have to type everything in. You need an interface which allows you and other people, to navigate easier. Might I suggest running a BBS?
I found Iron to be a lot more buggy and run a lot slower than Chrome. Perhaps when it becomes more mature it will be good, but it worked terribly for me.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you measure externalities?
They haven't been committed. They extend for an uncertain time horizon.
Additionally, the externalities you're talking about, are generally due to the socialization of some other service.
So you've 1 of 2 directions, you regulate, and increase taxation, and regulation, ad infinum, or you deregulate, and decrease taxation, and deregulate, ad infinum. Resulting in minimal (or no) government or huge government.
However, thank you for trivializing the field of economics.
LOL. Yeah, I bet you people get the 911 reference though.
Hey,
I'm from Adelaide also (was the guy who posted the story). To me teenager has always been between 10 and 20 (or 18, maybe), so no idea why people are nutting out over them being called teenagers.
What were they doing in a storm drain, you ask. Did you notice where it happened? Hackam. Probably Hackam West. So, to answer your question. What were they doing in a storm drain? Probably trying to get out of Hackam! I know I'd pick a storm drain over Hackam anyday! :-)
Nah, I got it mixed up, after reading what the other guy said, he was talking about some ECM that was in heavy use for a while. I got mixed up. Which makes sense since I remember something about AWACS.
Also, he didn't shoot SAM's at fighters for real, mainly just at trailing targets in war games. Though he accidentally locked on to the plane trailing the target once, but aborted in time.
Either way, one good thing was that even with America's awesomeness we still did really well, in fact, often flawless in these war games.
I'm not so sure about the Australian Over THe Horizon radar being unable to be used by SAM's for targeting.
My uncle used to be SAM commander (or whatever it's called) and he said there were plenty of times when they would lock on and fire at aircraft way over the horizon, when engaging in war games with the US. This was despite AWACS and similar.
Though he did say that most of these were with active radar, however when they (the US) started running stealth fighters in the games, they weren't able to track them. However, almost straight away all of the SAM sites were quickly sent down to the DSTO for upgrades, and each one came back with a special little switch which they would flick when ever certain conditions were met. He surmised that this allowed them to track and lock on aircraft using stealth technology using the OTH system.
They get taught about every single switch, how it works and what it does, so that they can fully understand the system, and ensure that it operates no matter what, or can recognize when somethings wrong. However, when this new switch was installed, it was kept quiet, they weren't told anything but "When this happens. Flick this.", and so they did, and from then on it was able to track and lock on any of these stealth fighters.
I could have my information wrong, but it sounds valid to me. I'd be interested to hear if anyone knows any details or has any other information on this system.
It's also isn't that we don't necessarily don't understand it, it's that our calculations have to come from summary data, which is spurious at best. Just ask anyone who studies statistics.
Calculating a summary, from a summary of a summary, to generate your answer, often leaves a lot of data incorrectly weighted and information hidden.
We'll never be able to know for certain, because we'll never be able to get enough information, in a timely enough fashion. We just calculate probabilities, hope we don't have holes in our logic, and do what we believe is right.
C'est la vie.
You'd be surprised exactly how much Government is in some business, especially those which are done for cultural benefit (like sports) where the subsidies come with strings attached.
Though, if it were a completely free business, then it should have the right to discriminate anyway it wants (Race, Gender, Sexuality, etc) as long as the people were voluntarily (Negative liberty wise) subjecting themselves to it.
Not that there necessarily is a connection between the business and the government in this situation, but the reason the lines are blurred and some people (such as yourself) don't see these sorts of connections are due to how people aren't willing to relinquish control of these organizations, which means there almost always is a connection, though for some businesses it's far less.
For instance:
Do you really want to pay (through taxation) for a business which doesn't treat people "equally"? (The former point)
Do you really want to let (through regulation) a business discriminate the way it wants? (The latter point)
I've got a feeling you don't like either of these situations. Where as libertarians don't like the former (since it involves Government taking money) but have no problem with the latter (since they understand the market will take care of that business).
Yeah, I hear that, as I read through the article I found myself realizing that I wasn't aligning with any one party.
Half the questions I was aligned with the democrats.
Half the questions I was aligned with the republicans.
And the other half I thought... This question isn't clear, nor is there a real libertarian answer.
So out of 150% of the questions, I barely aligned with anyone.
They needed a "Ron Paul Republican" section.
Still sounds like a cat to me.
All of these companies added to desktop computing, by making things easier, more affordable, and more commercialized.
To suggest one had more than another, is retarded. You can't know how much one company affected the others.
You can say who made the most money or similar, but that's about it.
Everything else is a normative assessment and is far too subjective to be meaningful.
There's a lot of other STD's out there which suck, which could be used for fear mongering
What do you mean "developing"?
*fffsssshhhh*
When I was a teenager, 8 years ago (2001-2002), instead of putting a CD deck in my car, I wanted to put my dad's old 8 track deck into my car. That way it would have been ironic, hip, and would have limited me to playing only his old 60s-80s 8 track tapes. Also, I had no money for a CD deck. Almost got it done, but lazy kicked in, and the 8 track deck needed to be repaired a bit, so I abandoned it.
I went around trying to find somewhere which might have one for real cheap, like a pawn shop or similar. This was a pretty interesting thing to go around asking.
I went into this kind of music pawn shop, which had heaps of old things, including old record players, however it was more focused on that sort of indie niche. I walked in and asked the person running the store if they have an 8 track player, especially for a car. There was this old druggie raver looking guy standing behind him looking at records. When I asked about the 8 track player, he turned around and said "Hey man, that was funny, I thought I heard you asking for an 8 track player", at which point I looked at him and said "I am", he looked back with a freaked out yet blank face and said "Whoah". He then proceeded to stare at me after that last thought. All I can think was that I caused him to have some sort of an acid flash back, which he experienced for the next 30 seconds.
Either way, I still got a pile of 8 track tapes and no 8 track player. Probably for the best, I now have a good car, with a good deck, and I like things which aren't shit, now. Though the old bomb (1981 Ford Falcon XD) was awesome for jumping over train tracks, going 200kph, drifting around dirt corners, shredding my tyres and similar.
Their utility at that moment is for a preference of WiFi, however that doesn't mean they wouldn't have another preference in another situation.
Yeah, we can ban them, and then they can drive without a license, where they don't have to sit exams or ludicrous "testing ... to ensure that their driving remains at a good standard".
You can't regulate safety, it doesn't work, so don't try. Voluntarily educate, that's the best you can do.
This is true. However, fatal accidents are mostly caused through excessive speed.
This is why they are so insane about it... because every life is precious!
The flaw in their logic however, is people who speed, are doing it with or without these limits. So they are attempting to throw millions of dollars, crazy regulations, and insane ideas, to reduce a few deaths. Australia has 21 million people and in April there were 151 deaths on the road (source). Which, though tragic, is a small amount of deaths, which won't be reduced, no matter what you do. Though these numbers will deviate heaps, as they aren't predictable, and in every incidents, they were accidents and nobody meant for it to happen.
In fact, there has been a correlation between speed limits and increased speeds, such that because it's more predictable, you can go faster, so you do. If there were no speed limits, it's less predictable, so you go slower where it's unsafe and faster where it is safe. Which is what people tend to do at the moment (with the speed limits), however they undervalue the probability of a crash because of the sign.
Similarly shared space, less signs, less laws, creates a safer environment by ensuring people understand how unsafe and unpredictable the environment is.
I'd like to see more of this, especially in Australia where we have speed limit signs, suggested limit signs, wild life signs, town signs, warning signs, slipery when wet signs, picture of the upcoming road signs, and similar.
I find that I all but block out those signs these days, as the time it takes to recognize and process them, the information becomes irelevant, or the information they have is so lowest common denominator that if I drove like that, I would be more dangerous as other people would come up behind me fast, wondering why I'm going so slow.
However, I contend that the worst thing is the propiganda that we have to watch. Where the government shows us in the most graphically violent way possible that their signs need to be obeyed. They do this while trying to censor our internet, and restrict violent movies (just a few) from being imported.
Yeah, it's also really distracting to have to pay attention to what the speed is.
There are many roads in Australia, where in the space of a kilometer or two, the speed limits can change as such... 80, 70, 60, 50, 60, 80, 60, 50, 25, 60.
This is also where they put the speed cameras, as it's easier to meet their quota's (yes they have quota's).
So these areas, you end up paying attention to the side of the road, as opposed to the road. So you're distracted, which causes most accidents (not most fatal accidents, but most accidents).
If you're worried about the consequences not being made worse, this is a ridiculous argument as the law is already flexible enough to account for wreckless endangerment.
Or from rapid share:
http://rapidshare.com/files/230207661/Dark.Night.of.the.Soul.2009.rar
Here's a direct link to listen to the music:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104129585
Or to download it use this torrent:
http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/1922583/2325666/
Great point!
Yep, or to put it another way, just his .02 dollars.
Which is it Apple, Squirrel or Fish? Pick a side, we're at war!
Telnet doesn't work very well, you have to type everything in. You need an interface which allows you and other people, to navigate easier. Might I suggest running a BBS?
I found Iron to be a lot more buggy and run a lot slower than Chrome. Perhaps when it becomes more mature it will be good, but it worked terribly for me.