Not true - in the case of the 20k it is report-able income and the 25k value of the car is the lost value showing 5k in losses for the year meaning you wouldn't pay any taxes on the 20k because you didn't actually make money.
Here int he US if you have contractors or deal with people the company is supposed to send you a 1099 if they paid you X amount as they also will write off X amount as expenses so they don't pay taxes on it but rather you do.
In this case it would make sense for Ebay to be reporting 1099's (i know this is AU and not US but use the ideas not the names) and the individual would file them with their taxes just like anyone else.
I understand and agree with what they are trying to do, my bet is there is a better way of doing it via the existing tax laws than to make new laws for specialty cases.
And i could see them going exclusively after the corporate market except i seem to remember Windows RT will not be able to join a domain. Which places it clean out of the corporate market.
Yes this is defiantly squatting, 307 TLD's listed each by him with different LLC for each one, and all are generic names.
If this opening up of the TLD's was in any legit way trying to expand the net they would reject all his applications because none of them are legit for anything other than squatting. But it isn't legit but rather a cash out by ICANN and they are more than happy to take this guys/VC's money and let the net have to live with squatters.
And to dispute any of them it costs between 2-20,000$. This is such an obvious & massive cash out it mazes me that they are getting away with it without more uproar.
HAHAHA, you win the award for dumbest thing said on slashdot today, congrats! You somehow think that less people having the surgery will cause the price to DROP? It's no wonder you are a conservative because you are clearly a moron. Surgery isn't like a bunch of wireless routers sitting in the back of a best buy, it doesn't have a very elastic price curve, in fact often times the most expensive surgeries are the least common because the scarcity of the necessary skills and equipment tend to drive prices up, but the very high technical barriers(very expensive and specialized equipment and lack of chances to gain experience) mean that it's very difficult to bring extra capacity online. But then again, if you actually had a brain that required surgery you wouldn't be parroting Limbaugh, so I guess you are safe in that regard. But thanks for making me laugh, it's not just your stupidity, but how arrogant you ate about your stupidity that really turns a run of the mill idiotic comment into comedy gold.
I do love how based on a single comment you try to label me into a political group and how you make wonderfully outlandish claims. Are you ware of the actual costs of medical equipment? Are you aware of the true operating costs of hospitals if you where to pull the liability insurance requirements from them and the people practice medicine? Go do a little actual research, realize that most operations that happen are routine by nature and therefor do not fall into your one off high costs items.
Research is expensive, actual day to day operations are not.
Until you can explain how a normal person is supposed to afford to pay for a $200,000 surgery
Simple, they don't have that surgery, the more people who don't have the surgery the more the price will drop until it is at a balanced point, right now healthcare lives in a world where everything will be paid for and everything we can offer will be sold.
Personally, i take a lot of meds to be able to move, but i pay for them and i contribute to society. But for the amount of money spent on people with old age, hell let me just die, i'm not sure what everyone fascination is of making sure everyone can live as long as possible.
Also note that if your setup had the RAC sharing the main Ethernet port either you had it configured to do so or they cheeped out and didn't by the nice RAC's as normally once with RAC's have dedicated ports for the it with an option to use the main ports.
your missing the point.. the ability to control one cell/area over another.. right now they have an all or nothing. and Considering that you are trying to overlay a user interface solution to content that is natively displayed in a grid, while you could do it in say radial address scheme it would just add undo burden..
If L3 requested 270Gb of peering bandwidth and Comcast turned it down.. you have at least one side of a network that recognized a need for 270Gb of bandwidth that is missing..
Given L3 vs Comcast i'd have to side with L3 as the intelligent network provider. Sure somethings up for Comcast to turn it down BUT i doubt they turned it down because its "not needed" from a raw network traffic perspective.
Also "if" all data being treated equal - the fact that these people who complain about things like Netflix not working at peek time but at the same time Comcast's internal stuff works shows that the "last mile" and the trunk lines are not the issue.
their comment on "quickly redefined " means turn the raised buttons on and off quickly
What Jane is saying is to be able to define the areas that raise dynamically. The current incarnation of their tech requires the buttons to be raised in s specific place and shape based on what was manufactured. It equivalent to putting a permanent button on the side of the phone. But the true game changing will only occur when you can via software on the fly define where, when, shape, size to create buttons and have them turn on and off. This would require them to put nozzles and valves in a grid array over the entire screen, and from what i can see they don't have the valves yet nor a control method for them, right now they just have defined areas with a set of nozzles in each and a clear fluid and some way of creating/releasing pressure (maybe an electric piston?). It's very good idea, but requires a lot more R&D before it can be considered game changing.
Growing up i had problems just getting into the "advanced placement" stuff.. I've always been very good at math but never in English, in the county i grew up in you had to place/test at the "advanced" level for all subjects to be put into "advanced placement" if you where like me and defunct in one subject you couldn't advanced any more than the normal rate.
It wasn't until 8th grade i managed to talk the teachers into letting me take multiple levels of math at the same time so that i could actually learn something. the US public school system does not handle exceptions to the normal well.
I agree it is very different, and for that reason you can't say "it should be easy to manage a solid-oxide fuel cell running at 1000C as the power source for a car because my diesel powered ICE has burns up to 1000C"
Again your link is to something different than what i said, that temperature is for the operating (think constant) temperature of the plug it's self, not the spark it creates. Just like the operating temperature (think constant) for your diesel motor is a lot less than the burn temp of the vapor.
Again "Operating" temperature is constant a "cycle" temperature is just that, a cycle and not constant.
For fuel sell Operating and Cycle temperature are the same as it is one continuous long cycle while it is operating, where your ICE is not by any means constant.
I understand what you are saying but, if we are going to start calling peek temperature in the chamber as operating temp then i'd like to point out that the temperature of the spark from the plug is ~50-60,000C.
Why is this argument important? because while sure you might reach 1000C for a moment inside your diesel cylinder the overall operating temperature of the diesel engine is significantly lower than that. But for a fuel cell application the operational temperature is the actual continuous temperature of the device, in which case 1000C is extremely hard to manage in something the size of a normal motor.
I know you where trying to be witty but in reality your not comparing apples to apples here.
You do realize that that document is talking about pure theory and theoretical maximums? In reality the operational temperature of you diesel engine is far lower, the 550C is the ignition temp while the actual motor temp is closer to 100-150C.
Also note that isn't why diesel has a higher thermal efficiency in an ICE environment, but rather it's increased efficiency is because of how and when the fuel is added to the cylinder and the ignition mechanism which enables much higher compression ratios than are possible with gasoline fuel mixture spark systems.
you missed my point, but lets try this another way.
It is fine if someone gets drunk and kills the bartender, or the sales person at the liquor store, i mean they aren't "innocent"
It is fine if someone who smokes kills the truck driver for Marlboro, i mean is just the trafficker and ins't "innocent"
It is fine if a pharmacist goes and kills the one store next door, i mean they are just both dealers and aren't "innocent"
Again, using "innocent" is just so people can get a reaction out of others by making them thing this outside element is going to affect their lives, when in reality they are people too and either everyone is or no one is "innocent".
The problem is that people using this stuff are killing innocents.
This is a point less argument, outside of the person using what ever everyone is an "innocent". Everyone whom ever dies by the fault of another was a "innocent" because they did not kill them selves. People add the "innocents" because they know it will cause a reaction out of people, a reaction of "oh no they aren't just killing each other they are killing people like me".
The correct statement is "The problem is that people using this stuff are killing people" and that i can agree with, but if that is really your defense then back it up showing how likely you are to be killed by a person on "this stuff" vs. someone on one of the many many many other things we allow people to use every day. Then step back and realize that humans made it all the way up to the 19th century without having a ban on substances in the way we have now.
Slashdot Mirror
on the roof silly
that's only because RIM's radar was broken - everyone elses radar saw it coming before Apple even confirmed it's existence.
There is so much truth to that it's scary..
As an SAP consultant I agree with you, but let me take a moment to point to 81.
It's easy
S = Send
A = Another
P = Payment
Not true - in the case of the 20k it is report-able income and the 25k value of the car is the lost value showing 5k in losses for the year meaning you wouldn't pay any taxes on the 20k because you didn't actually make money.
Here int he US if you have contractors or deal with people the company is supposed to send you a 1099 if they paid you X amount as they also will write off X amount as expenses so they don't pay taxes on it but rather you do.
In this case it would make sense for Ebay to be reporting 1099's (i know this is AU and not US but use the ideas not the names) and the individual would file them with their taxes just like anyone else.
I understand and agree with what they are trying to do, my bet is there is a better way of doing it via the existing tax laws than to make new laws for specialty cases.
And i could see them going exclusively after the corporate market except i seem to remember Windows RT will not be able to join a domain. Which places it clean out of the corporate market.
Yes this is defiantly squatting, 307 TLD's listed each by him with different LLC for each one, and all are generic names.
If this opening up of the TLD's was in any legit way trying to expand the net they would reject all his applications because none of them are legit for anything other than squatting. But it isn't legit but rather a cash out by ICANN and they are more than happy to take this guys/VC's money and let the net have to live with squatters.
And to dispute any of them it costs between 2-20,000$. This is such an obvious & massive cash out it mazes me that they are getting away with it without more uproar.
if they gave the macbook air a docking station i'd be fine, but how it is i'll stick to my x series lenovos to get work done.
HAHAHA, you win the award for dumbest thing said on slashdot today, congrats! You somehow think that less people having the surgery will cause the price to DROP? It's no wonder you are a conservative because you are clearly a moron. Surgery isn't like a bunch of wireless routers sitting in the back of a best buy, it doesn't have a very elastic price curve, in fact often times the most expensive surgeries are the least common because the scarcity of the necessary skills and equipment tend to drive prices up, but the very high technical barriers(very expensive and specialized equipment and lack of chances to gain experience) mean that it's very difficult to bring extra capacity online. But then again, if you actually had a brain that required surgery you wouldn't be parroting Limbaugh, so I guess you are safe in that regard. But thanks for making me laugh, it's not just your stupidity, but how arrogant you ate about your stupidity that really turns a run of the mill idiotic comment into comedy gold.
I do love how based on a single comment you try to label me into a political group and how you make wonderfully outlandish claims. Are you ware of the actual costs of medical equipment? Are you aware of the true operating costs of hospitals if you where to pull the liability insurance requirements from them and the people practice medicine? Go do a little actual research, realize that most operations that happen are routine by nature and therefor do not fall into your one off high costs items.
Research is expensive, actual day to day operations are not.
Until you can explain how a normal person is supposed to afford to pay for a $200,000 surgery
Simple, they don't have that surgery, the more people who don't have the surgery the more the price will drop until it is at a balanced point, right now healthcare lives in a world where everything will be paid for and everything we can offer will be sold.
Personally, i take a lot of meds to be able to move, but i pay for them and i contribute to society. But for the amount of money spent on people with old age, hell let me just die, i'm not sure what everyone fascination is of making sure everyone can live as long as possible.
Also note that if your setup had the RAC sharing the main Ethernet port either you had it configured to do so or they cheeped out and didn't by the nice RAC's as normally once with RAC's have dedicated ports for the it with an option to use the main ports.
your missing the point.. the ability to control one cell/area over another.. right now they have an all or nothing. and Considering that you are trying to overlay a user interface solution to content that is natively displayed in a grid, while you could do it in say radial address scheme it would just add undo burden..
the joke is to actually say it out loud to someone... H-T-T-P-colon-slash-slash-slash-dot-dot-dot-slash
I only see one flaw in your comment.
If L3 requested 270Gb of peering bandwidth and Comcast turned it down.. you have at least one side of a network that recognized a need for 270Gb of bandwidth that is missing..
Given L3 vs Comcast i'd have to side with L3 as the intelligent network provider. Sure somethings up for Comcast to turn it down BUT i doubt they turned it down because its "not needed" from a raw network traffic perspective.
Also "if" all data being treated equal - the fact that these people who complain about things like Netflix not working at peek time but at the same time Comcast's internal stuff works shows that the "last mile" and the trunk lines are not the issue.
there is a difference between
quickly redefine
Define dynamically.
their comment on "quickly redefined " means turn the raised buttons on and off quickly
What Jane is saying is to be able to define the areas that raise dynamically. The current incarnation of their tech requires the buttons to be raised in s specific place and shape based on what was manufactured. It equivalent to putting a permanent button on the side of the phone. But the true game changing will only occur when you can via software on the fly define where, when, shape, size to create buttons and have them turn on and off. This would require them to put nozzles and valves in a grid array over the entire screen, and from what i can see they don't have the valves yet nor a control method for them, right now they just have defined areas with a set of nozzles in each and a clear fluid and some way of creating/releasing pressure (maybe an electric piston?). It's very good idea, but requires a lot more R&D before it can be considered game changing.
Growing up i had problems just getting into the "advanced placement" stuff.. I've always been very good at math but never in English, in the county i grew up in you had to place/test at the "advanced" level for all subjects to be put into "advanced placement" if you where like me and defunct in one subject you couldn't advanced any more than the normal rate.
It wasn't until 8th grade i managed to talk the teachers into letting me take multiple levels of math at the same time so that i could actually learn something. the US public school system does not handle exceptions to the normal well.
I agree it is very different, and for that reason you can't say "it should be easy to manage a solid-oxide fuel cell running at 1000C as the power source for a car because my diesel powered ICE has burns up to 1000C"
Again your link is to something different than what i said, that temperature is for the operating (think constant) temperature of the plug it's self, not the spark it creates. Just like the operating temperature (think constant) for your diesel motor is a lot less than the burn temp of the vapor.
Again "Operating" temperature is constant a "cycle" temperature is just that, a cycle and not constant.
For fuel sell Operating and Cycle temperature are the same as it is one continuous long cycle while it is operating, where your ICE is not by any means constant.
I understand what you are saying but, if we are going to start calling peek temperature in the chamber as operating temp then i'd like to point out that the temperature of the spark from the plug is ~50-60,000C.
Why is this argument important? because while sure you might reach 1000C for a moment inside your diesel cylinder the overall operating temperature of the diesel engine is significantly lower than that. But for a fuel cell application the operational temperature is the actual continuous temperature of the device, in which case 1000C is extremely hard to manage in something the size of a normal motor.
I know you where trying to be witty but in reality your not comparing apples to apples here.
You do realize that that document is talking about pure theory and theoretical maximums? In reality the operational temperature of you diesel engine is far lower, the 550C is the ignition temp while the actual motor temp is closer to 100-150C.
Also note that isn't why diesel has a higher thermal efficiency in an ICE environment, but rather it's increased efficiency is because of how and when the fuel is added to the cylinder and the ignition mechanism which enables much higher compression ratios than are possible with gasoline fuel mixture spark systems.
Your diesel runs significantly less than 1000 deg C. most run at ~550C or less.
you missed my point, but lets try this another way.
It is fine if someone gets drunk and kills the bartender, or the sales person at the liquor store, i mean they aren't "innocent"
It is fine if someone who smokes kills the truck driver for Marlboro, i mean is just the trafficker and ins't "innocent"
It is fine if a pharmacist goes and kills the one store next door, i mean they are just both dealers and aren't "innocent"
Again, using "innocent" is just so people can get a reaction out of others by making them thing this outside element is going to affect their lives, when in reality they are people too and either everyone is or no one is "innocent".
thank you, someone else who gets it
The problem is that people using this stuff are killing innocents.
This is a point less argument, outside of the person using what ever everyone is an "innocent". Everyone whom ever dies by the fault of another was a "innocent" because they did not kill them selves. People add the "innocents" because they know it will cause a reaction out of people, a reaction of "oh no they aren't just killing each other they are killing people like me".
The correct statement is "The problem is that people using this stuff are killing people" and that i can agree with, but if that is really your defense then back it up showing how likely you are to be killed by a person on "this stuff" vs. someone on one of the many many many other things we allow people to use every day. Then step back and realize that humans made it all the way up to the 19th century without having a ban on substances in the way we have now.