the number of possible coordinates that can happen on a world map are much much lower than the possibility of combinations of alphanumberic passwords with special characters.
The number of possible coordinates on a world map is infinite. What bounds the number of coordinate passwords is resolution of the images used to identify the coordinates.
Besides, you could easily increase the difficulty of cracking the password by requiring multiple locations.
Those post you were responding to was a response to a post by Pojut that got modded to -1 Troll; so in certain views, it appears that YOUR post was the parent.
Sorry for second reply, I though it was important:
One more note about Schiff: there's a reason he's derided as "Dr. Doom". He's a media whore... and a business whore. He very vocally trumps up gold while holding gold. His analysis of the economy is also sometimes shaky... his brokerage clients lost bundles in 2008 due to his errant predictions of dollar weakening (the dollar got stronger in 2008) and foreign growth outpacing domestic growth (untrue for the regions he predicted this for in 2008). He also predicted gold would hit $2000 an ounce in 2009... it did not (barely got over $1200). He now predicts it will hit $5000 or $10,000 an ounce in the next 5 to 10 years... I don't buy that either. Don't put your stock in this guy's predictions.
Get this book if you want an entry level on how the economy works.
Sorry, you need to qualify that statement. Read that book if you want to read an Austrian view of how the economy works. There are conflicting ideologies in economics, as I'm sure you're aware, and it's disingenuous to state that book as a definitive introduction to the subject.
You want a bubble? we are living it, the T-bill bubble is the mother of all bubbles. Once it bursts, expect higher taxes (government can not borrow, so it must confiscate) and high inflation (government can not borrow, so it must print money). This incidentally is very bullish for gold.
The T-bill bubble may not burst. There are plenty of factors that can prevent a collapse of the T-bill, including inflation and economic growth in the US, among other things. WEre we to take an Austrian approach, the bubble would burst. Luckily, the economy is not governed by Austrians, so we can take action to prevent it.
The fundamental problem I have with the Austrian school is the boom-and-bust cycles Austrian economics does nothing to address. I believe it is imperative that we ameliorate those cycles in order to maintain prosperity for more people; boom and bust cycles lead to exacerbated wealth concentration at the top, which I believe is bad for society.
Now, back to the topic at hand:
Buying from a vending machine is great for people like me. Getting gold from a dealer is a pain, they have high premiums, and you have to pay for shipping. A vending machine would hopefully eliminate some of the premium being paid for shipping and handling, as well as allow me to go locally.
These machines have a 30% premium (at least the ones deployed in Germany). Far worse than a dealer. Why not trade in certificates if you want to do your business locally (well, via courier for certs) and reduce the s&h costs?
Coal plants with modern scrubbers don't emit ANY mercury, so that negates your argument.
You know, if you're going to make up facts to support your positions, maybe you should make sure that your "facts" aren't easily refuted?
The best scrubbing technology we have today can achieve 90% removal -- under optimal conditions for certain types of plants. 50-70% is more typical, from what I've read.
If you have any kind of cite for the 100% removal you claim, can you please provide it? I'd be really interested in reading it.
If you're just talking out your ass when you make that claim, then I'll just continue to assume that any "fact" you purport in support of your arguments is false. Hasn't led me wrong so far.
and you realize that you don't plan for such a world
I don't. But some people do. There are a lot of people who live in compounds and are prepared for exactly that kind of world.
there is no such thing as planning for the breakdown of civilization. because such a future is no future for anyone, just injustice and crime and suffering and poverty
Well, you may right. But I think you're overly pessimistic. Civilization would be reborn. How long would it take? It depends on the scenario. Anywhere from a few years to many generations. But I wouldn't underestimate the ability of people to establish local stability as a community.
I answered that too. Trees DON'T sequester carbon. They eventually die, the bacteria/fungi eat them, and the carbon is released back to the atmosphere.
Well duh. But that's, as you point out, a whole lot better than the alternative -- burning fossil fuels. Which is the crux of this discussion. Which you clearly did NOT address in this discussion until after the point was raised.
Interesting piece. Napolitano is the only host on Fox that I think has the balls to call out the Republicans when they are wring.
Probably the same is true for Wikileaks, Wikipedia, Google, and other publishers. (shrug) You can make your own judgment.
Well, no we can't. I mean, we can make our own judgment, but it will have *zero* impact on what happens in this situation. It's the judgment of the CIA, the Pentagon, etc, that will determine how this plays out. In the long run, the best we can hope for is that after the fact, any bad actions by the government are found to be in error -- but the die was already cast. That's how free speech and other personal liberties are handled in the US... they are violated, and after the fact, it's decided that the violations were Bad. And hopefully the government restrains itself the next time around. Which seemed to work fine and dandy until the Neocons were able to implement their plans in the wake of 9/11, rolling back some of the gains made in the second half of the 20th century.
therefore, if you really believe we're all going mad max to bartertown in a few years, become a farmer. everything else you can do is pointless, including hording bars of yellowish metal
If we're going mad max, farming is not where the money is. Subsistence is important, but you can always *trade* for food. Which is where gold comes in, as a near-universal currency. If you have enough of it, you can manipulate local markets to your benefit.
But anyway, the people who make out best in a mad max situation will be the merchants. Being able to supply many people with what *they* need is way more profitable than just being able to supply yourself (and family) with what *you* need for baseline subsistence.
So I say, rather than hoard gold or learn to farm, hoard farming tools and steel knives. And guns and ammo. And fuel. But don't neglect the high-profit luxury items and their inputs... someone needs to supply (at a profit) the local warlords and their mistresses. Hoard silk. Hoard glassware. Hoard dyes. Oh, and don't forget to make sure you have the resources to employ heavies to keep those warlords from taking your stuff for free.
And while you're at it, you might as well just become one of those warlords, and synergistically apply your brutal local enforcement methods to ensuring you are the *only* supplier of durable goods in your area. Then you can make sure to maximize your profits.
Wait, sorry, did I get off track with a libertarian fantasy?
Given that the printing press at the FED is in overdrive, it is very likely that the dollar will accelerate its decline in the next few years. Every dollar printed, does not create purchasing power, it simply dilutes the purchasing power of all the existing dollars out there.
Why do you link to BASE but not M1 or M2? M2, in particular, is a better representation of the money supply, and if you look at M2, you'd see that it doesn't look so ridiculous (although there is high growth). BASE is going up very fast to offset the reduction from the non-BASE parts of the money supply...
Look, I understand that you have a position you want to push. But if you really understand the economics of the money supply, you know you're being disingenuous. If you don't truly understand the economics, then fine...
One more thing:
Because as the dollar continues to lose value against gold at roughly 20% in the last 5 years (actually more like 10 years but that is not displayed on that web site), anyone getting 1.75% interest on a CD or 2.5% on a T-bill is an idiot.
Sure, until the gold bubble bursts. A CD or a T-bill has a lot less risk than gold.
I'd say that anyone who puts all their investment into gold is an idiot. Diversification is extremely important.
And so we see the second (or third) salvo in the great 21st century Sino-American conflict. China has embargoed our proxy off their shore, we have likely responded in a manner as yet unknown.
But really China? Really? You have to go straight for the jugular and take down Facebook? There will be mass hysteria, cats and dogs will dance the lambada, and blood will rain from the sky now that you've taken down our new national pastime, Facebook.
/adjusts tinfoil hat to a rakish tilt
But really, wouldn't that be a good way for China to demonstrate how easily they can mess with us?
Of course it is. The analogy was quite apt. I'm not sure why he got so much shit for making it.
Because it was quite obvious that he didn't know what the fuck he was talking about, and was paraphrasing what someone had told him. It's laughable to try to impart understanding with an analogy when the person trying to impart understanding only groks one half of the analogy.
I learned the lesson the hard way -- rock salt from a shotgun when I was a kid. That's a lesson quite a few younguns could use -- although I deplore the use of violence, I am very tempted sometimes.
Because Pandora needs a better revenue stream in order to properly serve the people they want to serve?
That doesn't really make sense. It has nothing at all to do with getting their product (eardrums) to their customers (advertisers).
Also don't need to remain connected over a shitty cell network
I've never had a problem with using Pandora on my cell.
instead I have a dozen hours of streams already recorded and I can listen to them whenever I want without draining the my phone battery during constant 3g use(which is just short of GPS as far as phones and battery life performance goes).
Granted, I'm not out in the field all day, but battery life when using Pandora has never been a problem for me. Usually I'm at my office, in my car, or at home when I want to listen to music. All these are places where I don't need to rely on battery life.
If you use your phone to do everything, that's cool, but I use my PSP for gaming, my phone for phoning, and my Slacker and Sansa Fuze for music listening because they're better at doing the task at hand and have better battery life under those conditions.
Wow, that sucks. Do you have to carry your backpack around with you wherever you go?
FYI, the reason Pandora can offer their service for free is because of the restrictions on how you listen to it... they pay reduced royalty rates because you *can't* listen to just exactly what you want to. In exchange, you get to listen to a lot of music for free, with relatively few ads. There's no way Pandora could hook up with Slacker and maintain their current business model. Of course, you also fail to mention that you have to *pay* for the privilege of timeshifting those streams, skipping ads, etc. Apples to oranges, here -- you're comparing a free service to a paid service.
And, FWIW, my phone works perfectly fine at playing the music files I've saved to it, without having to access the cellular network. If I want to extend battery life, I can just listen to that music.
Money is tight for companies like Pandora, which is why they should go in to the hardware business like Slacker, or at least partner with Slacker.
Why would they do that? No one wants to lug around Yet Another Gadget. Although you can buy Pandora-equipped stereos, Pandora apps work just fine on smartphones. Even back in '07 Pandora partnered up with Sprint for firmware packages on Sprint phones so Sprint customers could use Pandora on their phone... nowadays you can use Pandora on just about any new smartphone. Especially since any smartphone worth its salt supports multitasking... why would you need a separate device?
I'm thinking you might be surprised about that. Could Texas's ports support all of the red states? How much money would need to be spent to connect them to the Mississippi?
Food production? Hardly. Texas can't produce enough food to feed itself. They're a food importing state just like many of the blue states -- with the disadvantage of not enough water to use all their arable land.
Energy-wise, you're right. Texas is positioned much better than many of the other red states in terms of self-sufficiency. But Texas alone can't support the drain of the other red states... they are just barely in the black for federal balance of payments.
If you are going to blow up a nuclear bomb, which would be better: Nevada or Connecticut?
That's one example of where geography determines the site of military bases.
Having military bases in your state isn't always the cash cow that it may seem, and there certainly are costs associated with the base that must be lived with afterward.
So why do states fight like the dickens to keep military bases when there's a round of base closures?
And you are complaining that you want these bases in your back yard?
No, that's not what I said. But you do recognize that decisions on locations of military bases has often been political, and the bases are a feather in the cap of a politicians when he's battling for votes? Military bases == jobs. Those states with poor employment fight the hardest for military bases because the jobs are so important to them. Funding gets handed out as pork to entice support for other things.
(And FWIW, we have some issues with artillery ranges in the blue state I live in. For example, errant artillery fire hitting houses, live rounds instead of dummy rounds setting fires that burned 10000+ acres and some homes, etc. Every 2-3 years there's some accident that causes a quickly-forgotten uproar)
There is a massive amount of wealth transfer that happens from blue states to red states, and I question the ability of red states to get by without that subsidization.
Really? How much "interest" does the janitor cleaning Microsoft's floors really have? Sure it's a job but I don't hear MS speaking-out for the rights of janitors. Often they do just the opposite.
We've been over this before. A corporation does not represent the interests of its employees. A corporation is a proxy for the interests of its owners.
Do owners of companies not have rights as individuals who choose to associate with other individuals as owners of a corporation?
Don't be so sure about that. I'd question whether the red-staters would remain happy if their cash cow dried up.
Why do the red states have the bulk of military bases? Stimulus/pork-barrel spending. As for energy and food... who exactly would the red states sell them to? Let's see what the red-state economies look like when they don't have the blue states to purchase their goods.
We're interdependent. Neither "side" would fare well independently without a sizable period of time to adjust.
What's indisputable, though, is the OP's point, which you failed to address. The red states are subsidized by the blue states, quite heavily in most cases.
Except in the US the rural states are the ones the East and South keep poor by controlling large percentages of land through the BLM, National Forest Service, National Park Service and DoD.
That's a bunch of whargarble. It's not federal or regional control of land that keeps the rural states poor. More arable land isn't going to help you get richer. Mineral extraction is a slightly different matter... but the mining companies know they can get minerals much cheaper overseas. It's not federal land management that makes the US a poor prospect for mining... it's labor costs and environmental/social regulations. As an aside, I think those regulations are a good thing.
As for strategic viability of red vs. blue states... Blue states have more and better ports. And the cash to buy things to get shipped into those ports. Can't say the same for the Red states. Short-term, food and power are issues. But money can overcome those issues. Not sure about the red states ability to overcome their issues... lack of capital. Lack of ports. Lack of infrastructure in general (especially once the blue-state subsidy is gone).
Slashdot Mirror
The number of possible coordinates on a world map is infinite. What bounds the number of coordinate passwords is resolution of the images used to identify the coordinates.
Besides, you could easily increase the difficulty of cracking the password by requiring multiple locations.
Haha... burnt by the slashcode.
Those post you were responding to was a response to a post by Pojut that got modded to -1 Troll; so in certain views, it appears that YOUR post was the parent.
Slashcode pwnage strikes again.
Sorry for second reply, I though it was important:
One more note about Schiff: there's a reason he's derided as "Dr. Doom". He's a media whore... and a business whore. He very vocally trumps up gold while holding gold. His analysis of the economy is also sometimes shaky... his brokerage clients lost bundles in 2008 due to his errant predictions of dollar weakening (the dollar got stronger in 2008) and foreign growth outpacing domestic growth (untrue for the regions he predicted this for in 2008). He also predicted gold would hit $2000 an ounce in 2009... it did not (barely got over $1200). He now predicts it will hit $5000 or $10,000 an ounce in the next 5 to 10 years... I don't buy that either. Don't put your stock in this guy's predictions.
Sorry, you need to qualify that statement. Read that book if you want to read an Austrian view of how the economy works. There are conflicting ideologies in economics, as I'm sure you're aware, and it's disingenuous to state that book as a definitive introduction to the subject.
The T-bill bubble may not burst. There are plenty of factors that can prevent a collapse of the T-bill, including inflation and economic growth in the US, among other things. WEre we to take an Austrian approach, the bubble would burst. Luckily, the economy is not governed by Austrians, so we can take action to prevent it.
The fundamental problem I have with the Austrian school is the boom-and-bust cycles Austrian economics does nothing to address. I believe it is imperative that we ameliorate those cycles in order to maintain prosperity for more people; boom and bust cycles lead to exacerbated wealth concentration at the top, which I believe is bad for society.
Now, back to the topic at hand:
These machines have a 30% premium (at least the ones deployed in Germany). Far worse than a dealer. Why not trade in certificates if you want to do your business locally (well, via courier for certs) and reduce the s&h costs?
You know, if you're going to make up facts to support your positions, maybe you should make sure that your "facts" aren't easily refuted?
The best scrubbing technology we have today can achieve 90% removal -- under optimal conditions for certain types of plants. 50-70% is more typical, from what I've read.
If you have any kind of cite for the 100% removal you claim, can you please provide it? I'd be really interested in reading it.
If you're just talking out your ass when you make that claim, then I'll just continue to assume that any "fact" you purport in support of your arguments is false. Hasn't led me wrong so far.
I don't. But some people do. There are a lot of people who live in compounds and are prepared for exactly that kind of world.
Well, you may right. But I think you're overly pessimistic. Civilization would be reborn. How long would it take? It depends on the scenario. Anywhere from a few years to many generations. But I wouldn't underestimate the ability of people to establish local stability as a community.
Well duh. But that's, as you point out, a whole lot better than the alternative -- burning fossil fuels. Which is the crux of this discussion. Which you clearly did NOT address in this discussion until after the point was raised.
Well, no we can't. I mean, we can make our own judgment, but it will have *zero* impact on what happens in this situation. It's the judgment of the CIA, the Pentagon, etc, that will determine how this plays out. In the long run, the best we can hope for is that after the fact, any bad actions by the government are found to be in error -- but the die was already cast. That's how free speech and other personal liberties are handled in the US... they are violated, and after the fact, it's decided that the violations were Bad. And hopefully the government restrains itself the next time around. Which seemed to work fine and dandy until the Neocons were able to implement their plans in the wake of 9/11, rolling back some of the gains made in the second half of the 20th century.
If we're going mad max, farming is not where the money is. Subsistence is important, but you can always *trade* for food. Which is where gold comes in, as a near-universal currency. If you have enough of it, you can manipulate local markets to your benefit.
But anyway, the people who make out best in a mad max situation will be the merchants. Being able to supply many people with what *they* need is way more profitable than just being able to supply yourself (and family) with what *you* need for baseline subsistence.
So I say, rather than hoard gold or learn to farm, hoard farming tools and steel knives. And guns and ammo. And fuel. But don't neglect the high-profit luxury items and their inputs... someone needs to supply (at a profit) the local warlords and their mistresses. Hoard silk. Hoard glassware. Hoard dyes. Oh, and don't forget to make sure you have the resources to employ heavies to keep those warlords from taking your stuff for free.
And while you're at it, you might as well just become one of those warlords, and synergistically apply your brutal local enforcement methods to ensuring you are the *only* supplier of durable goods in your area. Then you can make sure to maximize your profits.
Wait, sorry, did I get off track with a libertarian fantasy?
Why do you link to BASE but not M1 or M2? M2, in particular, is a better representation of the money supply, and if you look at M2, you'd see that it doesn't look so ridiculous (although there is high growth). BASE is going up very fast to offset the reduction from the non-BASE parts of the money supply...
Look, I understand that you have a position you want to push. But if you really understand the economics of the money supply, you know you're being disingenuous. If you don't truly understand the economics, then fine...
One more thing:
Sure, until the gold bubble bursts. A CD or a T-bill has a lot less risk than gold.
I'd say that anyone who puts all their investment into gold is an idiot. Diversification is extremely important.
Which is irrelevant to the parent to your point, regarding carbon-impact of burning hardwoods.
Yes, but when you were comparing features, you compared the *paid* Slacker service to the *free* Pandora service. Disingenuous.
And using default font configurations like a normal person.
And so we see the second (or third) salvo in the great 21st century Sino-American conflict. China has embargoed our proxy off their shore, we have likely responded in a manner as yet unknown.
But really China? Really? You have to go straight for the jugular and take down Facebook? There will be mass hysteria, cats and dogs will dance the lambada, and blood will rain from the sky now that you've taken down our new national pastime, Facebook.
/adjusts tinfoil hat to a rakish tilt
But really, wouldn't that be a good way for China to demonstrate how easily they can mess with us?
Because it was quite obvious that he didn't know what the fuck he was talking about, and was paraphrasing what someone had told him. It's laughable to try to impart understanding with an analogy when the person trying to impart understanding only groks one half of the analogy.
I learned the lesson the hard way -- rock salt from a shotgun when I was a kid. That's a lesson quite a few younguns could use -- although I deplore the use of violence, I am very tempted sometimes.
I don't know how I forgot that... oops.
That doesn't really make sense. It has nothing at all to do with getting their product (eardrums) to their customers (advertisers).
I've never had a problem with using Pandora on my cell.
Why would they do that? No one wants to lug around Yet Another Gadget. Although you can buy Pandora-equipped stereos, Pandora apps work just fine on smartphones. Even back in '07 Pandora partnered up with Sprint for firmware packages on Sprint phones so Sprint customers could use Pandora on their phone... nowadays you can use Pandora on just about any new smartphone. Especially since any smartphone worth its salt supports multitasking... why would you need a separate device?
I'm thinking you might be surprised about that. Could Texas's ports support all of the red states? How much money would need to be spent to connect them to the Mississippi?
Food production? Hardly. Texas can't produce enough food to feed itself. They're a food importing state just like many of the blue states -- with the disadvantage of not enough water to use all their arable land.
Energy-wise, you're right. Texas is positioned much better than many of the other red states in terms of self-sufficiency. But Texas alone can't support the drain of the other red states... they are just barely in the black for federal balance of payments.
That's one example of where geography determines the site of military bases.
So why do states fight like the dickens to keep military bases when there's a round of base closures?
No, that's not what I said. But you do recognize that decisions on locations of military bases has often been political, and the bases are a feather in the cap of a politicians when he's battling for votes? Military bases == jobs. Those states with poor employment fight the hardest for military bases because the jobs are so important to them. Funding gets handed out as pork to entice support for other things.
(And FWIW, we have some issues with artillery ranges in the blue state I live in. For example, errant artillery fire hitting houses, live rounds instead of dummy rounds setting fires that burned 10000+ acres and some homes, etc. Every 2-3 years there's some accident that causes a quickly-forgotten uproar)
There is a massive amount of wealth transfer that happens from blue states to red states, and I question the ability of red states to get by without that subsidization.
I'm not sure I don't have a few years on you. But I'll respect your lawn anyway, since that's just the type of guy I am.
We've been over this before. A corporation does not represent the interests of its employees. A corporation is a proxy for the interests of its owners.
Do owners of companies not have rights as individuals who choose to associate with other individuals as owners of a corporation?
That's all well and good, if we were talking about applications -- we're not. We're talking about emacs, which is an operating system.
Sheesh.
Why do the red states have the bulk of military bases? Stimulus/pork-barrel spending. As for energy and food... who exactly would the red states sell them to? Let's see what the red-state economies look like when they don't have the blue states to purchase their goods.
We're interdependent. Neither "side" would fare well independently without a sizable period of time to adjust.
What's indisputable, though, is the OP's point, which you failed to address. The red states are subsidized by the blue states, quite heavily in most cases.
That's a bunch of whargarble. It's not federal or regional control of land that keeps the rural states poor. More arable land isn't going to help you get richer. Mineral extraction is a slightly different matter... but the mining companies know they can get minerals much cheaper overseas. It's not federal land management that makes the US a poor prospect for mining... it's labor costs and environmental/social regulations. As an aside, I think those regulations are a good thing.
As for strategic viability of red vs. blue states... Blue states have more and better ports. And the cash to buy things to get shipped into those ports. Can't say the same for the Red states. Short-term, food and power are issues. But money can overcome those issues. Not sure about the red states ability to overcome their issues... lack of capital. Lack of ports. Lack of infrastructure in general (especially once the blue-state subsidy is gone).