The amazonaws example would potentially be problematic. I assume the 3-level country domains would be handled appropriately since each country TLD is defined to use three parts as the most basic domain names... now whether Chrome respects that is to be seen.
(C) It's real but not nearly the "crisis" that "scientifically illiterate politicians and social action groups around the globe" say it is.
If these people were serious about finding real solutions, they would look at all the scientific research that has been done time and time again related to nuclear energy. And of course, wind energy, solar energy, and many other kinds that reduce pollution and harmful emissions.
Voting for people who have a soap-box that isn't grounded in reality is voting against real solutions.
It's like having a car with 100,000km warranty and at 100,500km the gas tank falls out.
It's not even like that. The car was purchased with no warranty, but the manufacturer later publishes that (in good business) it will offer safety recalls for equipment in cars that are less than 10 years old. After 10 years and 1 month, it is discovered that a flaw in the torque converter means that solar flares can cause the engine to explode if green transmission fluid is used, and the manufacturer offers a recall anyway.
Agreed on points 1, 2, and 3. Based on the article it seems that we don't know whether these capabilities will exist with this design or not (although they easily could... click on the chip and the entire URL shows in the address bar).
Point 4, I would argue that this design is intended to make phishing much harder. The domain name shows, excluding any subdomains, so http://bank-of-america.shadywebsite.ru/login.php only shows "shadywebsite.ru".
The problem, I feel, is that insurance is so often tied to your employer. They provide lower direct costs to you, in exchange for:
- No choice or very little choice in plan or coverage. - The condition that they can drop you when you are no longer employed, unless you continue your plan under COBRA which (as you found out) can cost a lot more than you were used to paying.
By the way, I'm glad your max out-of-pocket for medical this year was $4500. I claimed $35,000 out-of-pocket medical costs on my tax return, and that was with employer insurance and not including premiums.
Pretty much nothing is wrong with it. Microsoft has become a huge supporter of open source and recently open sourced major components of the.NET framework and more recently their beta Roslyn compiler.
I know, I know... they will never be truly open source until they give all the code they ever created and will ever create away for free and also throw in a car to everyone who has ever run Linux.
I have no problem with ISPs charging a premium to support a separate direct pipe to the service provider that provides guaranteed service quality. What I have a problem with is the ISP packet shaping on their standard Internet gateway.
In other words, on the standard Internet backbone, if I can watch Youtube at 5 Mbps, I should be able to watch Netflix, Hulu, Vudu at that rate. I should also be able to do VoIP at that rate. There should be no difference, assuming the service provider is not the bottleneck. And I'd be ok with charging Netflix a premium to setup a direct pipe that gives me 10 Mbps, or charging Microsoft a premium for a direct pipe to Xbox Live servers for better latency (and I would assume those costs would get passed on to me as the consumer, perhaps giving me the option based on whether I use the dedicated pipe or the standard one).
People just wanted to get from one place to another; how didn't matter much.
Part of a transport system is personal (the carriage) and part is infrastructural (the road). Those whose market was on the personal side wanted to control the infrastructural side, which is the problem.
This is just another reason we need less power in Washington and more in the states. It is much more difficult for big corporations to lobby all state governments than it is to lobby the federal government.
Sure, we might end up with a state or two heavily lobbied by Google, but a State of Google is arguably better than the United States of Google.
These prices are determined in a free market for equities (anyone can buy and sell, and transaction costs are minimal). If you think you are "smarter than the market", then you are free to buy leveraged options and monetize your vastly superior intellect. After you have done so, please come back and post a picture of your new yacht.
What does any of that have to do with math? My point, if it weren't obvious, is that market value isn't built on math but rather on feels. I feel good about this company therefore I buy, and others feel the same therefore the market value goes up.
It just shows that the stock market is a game, not built on actual math but built on intuition, strategy, fear, and comfort. How else can a simple act of splitting up a company (that is already 3 separate businesses) create so much "value"?
Anyway, thanks but I'll pass on the stock market. If I'm going to invest in a company, I want it to be a company with long term goals where my contribution actually makes a difference... not one that is beholden to the short-term interests of so many shareholders that I have no real capability to influence the company's direction for the better.
Slashdot Mirror
To be fair, getting them online and sharing knowledge can be a catalyst for those kinds of changes.
The amazonaws example would potentially be problematic. I assume the 3-level country domains would be handled appropriately since each country TLD is defined to use three parts as the most basic domain names... now whether Chrome respects that is to be seen.
(C) It's real but not nearly the "crisis" that "scientifically illiterate politicians and social action groups around the globe" say it is.
If these people were serious about finding real solutions, they would look at all the scientific research that has been done time and time again related to nuclear energy. And of course, wind energy, solar energy, and many other kinds that reduce pollution and harmful emissions.
Voting for people who have a soap-box that isn't grounded in reality is voting against real solutions.
So money == speech when it fits your narrative?
It's like having a car with 100,000km warranty and at 100,500km the gas tank falls out.
It's not even like that. The car was purchased with no warranty, but the manufacturer later publishes that (in good business) it will offer safety recalls for equipment in cars that are less than 10 years old. After 10 years and 1 month, it is discovered that a flaw in the torque converter means that solar flares can cause the engine to explode if green transmission fluid is used, and the manufacturer offers a recall anyway.
But does the box explicitly state that the software will receive updates for a particular period of time or until a certain date?
The fact that users received software updates at all can be seen as unwarranted kindness on the behalf of Microsoft.
Agreed on points 1, 2, and 3. Based on the article it seems that we don't know whether these capabilities will exist with this design or not (although they easily could... click on the chip and the entire URL shows in the address bar).
Point 4, I would argue that this design is intended to make phishing much harder. The domain name shows, excluding any subdomains, so http://bank-of-america.shadywebsite.ru/login.php only shows "shadywebsite.ru".
she was capable of having such things explained to her
She would have totally understood that.
Wait, which is it? She was able to figure it out, or she would have theoretically been able to? It seems like you are changing your story.
Unless you are talking about taking money from all people to give to the rich government, I have no clue what you are talking about.
One of these is not like the others. Hint: it's the one that American people might have some semblance of control over.
If money == speech, then speech == money and I can buy a new TV with all my free speech, and a car and a house and a space rocket while I'm at it.
[citation needed]
Isn't that pretty much the same as talking to yourself?
The problem, I feel, is that insurance is so often tied to your employer. They provide lower direct costs to you, in exchange for:
- No choice or very little choice in plan or coverage.
- The condition that they can drop you when you are no longer employed, unless you continue your plan under COBRA which (as you found out) can cost a lot more than you were used to paying.
By the way, I'm glad your max out-of-pocket for medical this year was $4500. I claimed $35,000 out-of-pocket medical costs on my tax return, and that was with employer insurance and not including premiums.
Obama uses the term "Obamacare".
to go along with the tablet you don't want
As opposed to the tablet I really want, but when I buy it, realize that all it amounts to is a $500 Facebook app?
Pretty much nothing is wrong with it. Microsoft has become a huge supporter of open source and recently open sourced major components of the .NET framework and more recently their beta Roslyn compiler.
I know, I know... they will never be truly open source until they give all the code they ever created and will ever create away for free and also throw in a car to everyone who has ever run Linux.
I have no problem with ISPs charging a premium to support a separate direct pipe to the service provider that provides guaranteed service quality. What I have a problem with is the ISP packet shaping on their standard Internet gateway.
In other words, on the standard Internet backbone, if I can watch Youtube at 5 Mbps, I should be able to watch Netflix, Hulu, Vudu at that rate. I should also be able to do VoIP at that rate. There should be no difference, assuming the service provider is not the bottleneck. And I'd be ok with charging Netflix a premium to setup a direct pipe that gives me 10 Mbps, or charging Microsoft a premium for a direct pipe to Xbox Live servers for better latency (and I would assume those costs would get passed on to me as the consumer, perhaps giving me the option based on whether I use the dedicated pipe or the standard one).
People just wanted to get from one place to another; how didn't matter much.
Part of a transport system is personal (the carriage) and part is infrastructural (the road). Those whose market was on the personal side wanted to control the infrastructural side, which is the problem.
(You know, ignoring the radioactivity of all the corroded stuff that might be in the water... meh, run it through a Brita, it'll be alright.)
Changing that plan a bit... maybe with a little less mass murder...
Putting spent nuclear fuel in such a tank could kill many of the microorganisms and make the water safer for consumption.
This is just another reason we need less power in Washington and more in the states. It is much more difficult for big corporations to lobby all state governments than it is to lobby the federal government.
Sure, we might end up with a state or two heavily lobbied by Google, but a State of Google is arguably better than the United States of Google.
These prices are determined in a free market for equities (anyone can buy and sell, and transaction costs are minimal). If you think you are "smarter than the market", then you are free to buy leveraged options and monetize your vastly superior intellect. After you have done so, please come back and post a picture of your new yacht.
What does any of that have to do with math? My point, if it weren't obvious, is that market value isn't built on math but rather on feels. I feel good about this company therefore I buy, and others feel the same therefore the market value goes up.
It just shows that the stock market is a game, not built on actual math but built on intuition, strategy, fear, and comfort. How else can a simple act of splitting up a company (that is already 3 separate businesses) create so much "value"?
Anyway, thanks but I'll pass on the stock market. If I'm going to invest in a company, I want it to be a company with long term goals where my contribution actually makes a difference... not one that is beholden to the short-term interests of so many shareholders that I have no real capability to influence the company's direction for the better.
And this is why we don't call this math... but rather "making shit up" to get money out of people.
In a discussion about ID/creation, how could you not?