Gates was talking about spam from a users point of view not a technical one. Spam, for users, is not a big deal anymore because of how good spam filtering takes care of it. I get MUCH less spam delivered to my inbox (1 or 2) than I did 2 years ago (100+). My spam filter gets over 200 a day still, but it really doesn't impact me at all.
Not to be an asshole, but you do realize that there are different versions of Windows for servers, and that Microsoft isn't totally retarded... they could only push this setting to Windows 2000 Pro, or Windows XP.
If by "a little bit" you mean over $1 million, then yeah, I think if you've saved up A MILLION DOLLARS, you can give some back.
Nobody is saying your kids cant start off with a better life than you, but if you're giving them $1 MILLION, perhaps you can give some back to the people you fucked over to get that much money in the first place?
Thats just not true. These lies are told over and over, but they don't hold water.
For ONE, with the value of a business or farm, a bank would have no problem giving someone a loan to pay the tax on something. So, if you were given a $1m business, and the tax came to $300,000 you could simply take out a loan to pay that taxes. I'd call that a stupidity tax because there are so many ways around that its funny.
Family businesses are rarely sold to pay taxes. For one, the kids often sell the business to avoid having to run it, not to pay taxes. Also, any good accountant would tell the owner to run the business as a LLC which would be exempt from these rules because it is its own entity and not handed down like a sole business. You can reorg an existing business at any time, so there is no reason to use that as an excuse.
Secondly, there are less family farms because younger kids are realizing farming sucks and are moving to the city. Or their land is worth more sold to a large company (economy of scale) than for them to continue to farm it. Not because of taxes forcing them to sell it.
Please read my comment about starting a LLC. Apparently, your hatred for "The Man" means you're totally unprepared for starting your own business. If you think starting your own business means things like, no dress codes, no overtime, and vacations whenever you want, think again. Owning your own business means working hundreds of hours with little to no return, and sacrificing family or social time to make sure its a success.
Judging from your comments, I don't think you have to worry about handing it off...
The fact that Bush only won by a small margin didn't stop him from saying it was a mandate from God for him to continue running the country.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we need high enough taxes to pay for what we spend, or we've got to cut spending. Only an idiot like Shurb could think that we could CUT taxes (to the rich) and INCREASE spending (to make a profit for the rich).
What this country needs is a balanced budget amendment. Maybe the democrats will push that. Probably not... but if they cut funding to the war "of terror" at least it will curb spending somewhat.
Yeah, because when we die, we shouldn't have to give back anything to the country that supported us!
Personally, I'm all for the inheritance (aka: death) tax. You can't take it with you, and why shouldn't your estate have to pay something to the government? If you've managed to amass enough to hit the threshold where the tax comes in (what is it, $80,000 or something) after you die, you can afford give a little back.
Instead, we've got people who make minimum wage supporting the country, and those who are giving their grandkids $100,000 saying its too much to ask to give a little bit of that to the government.
Of course you won't get fast speeds if your paying $14.95 per month. You get what you pay for. Most people have the fastest because its only a little bit more expensive.
That _might_ be. My previous employer got sued every winter as people would watch the temperature and as soon as it got down to like 30 degrees and started to ice up would decide that it was scary and time to go home.
Of course, they'd fall on their way to the car and sue, even though the employer didn't have time to do anything about it yet...
They usually won, too. Except for the one case where the person had commented to their co-worker that the wanted a year off, so they were going to run outside and "see what happened".
That's not true. If you don't salt the walkways and you have reason to believe they might be slippery, then you can be sued for negligence.
Especially if any of the renters ever complained that it was slippery. Then there would be proof that the landlord knew of the condition and actively neglected to do anything about it.
Common carrier is a total departure from the legal norm of being responsible for things even if you aren't aware of them.
Heres been my theory on Electronic voting for awhile. Yes, the system is more expensive, but at some point we need to weigh the cost/benifit of true elections.
When people come in to vote, they're checked off the list by the front table, as is done today. They go to a booth with a machine, where they touch screen and cast their votes. The machine, then, prints off a sheet, with their votes in some sort of machine-readable barcodes, which are encrypted with a public key. This means that anyone could develop the equipment to read these codes (which is key to my next step) but actually creating them is much more difficult. The votes are also tabulated on a main system at this time.
They then take that sheet of barcodes to another station. This station is developed by a seperate company. They slide it in, and then look through a hood on a screen as their votes are decoded from the barcodes. They press a YES / NO button to "is this how you wanted to vote?" The sheet is then either stored away securely. This system also tabulates the votes on their own main system.
At the end of the night, both main systems vote numbers are compared. If there is a difference, they can check all the barcoded recipts that are stored away to verify the real count.
Of course, bonus points for all the systems running OSS software...
And how many times has America stepped in to one of those land battles and not totally f'ed things up. Besides times where we went in with assistance, like in WW2.
For Maximum effiency you're currect, but there are such things as 1/4 wave antennas or 1/8th wave antennas. Many hand-held two way radios transmit on VHF and have antennas that are around 8 inches. Most LCD panels on laptops are large enough to hide that internally...
True enough, but there is data-bandwidth, and RF bandwidth. They're two seperate things, although they both use the same term.
It is not incorrect to say that a TV channel has 6MHz of bandwidth, although that is in the analog world. And QAM is not the most efficient, as we're putting about 45megabit into the 6MHz channels for OTA HD broadcasting...
American 802.11g has available bandwidth of 72MHz from Channel 1 to Channel 12. Worst case scenario, thats 3 non-overlapping channels at 54mb/sec each so 162megabits per second.
VHF TV is 12 channels that are 6 MHz each in width, so a total of... you guessed it, 72MHz! So, there is the same amount of bandwidth available in the VHF TV Spectrum with two additional benifits: VHF transmitters are MUCH cheaper than 2.4GHz stuff and also usually can crank out more power, and also VHF passes through walls much better.
The only caravat is that VHF TV spectrum isn't continual. From Channel 6 to Channel 7 is a large gap that fits all the aircraft bands (130Mhz) some pagers (150Mhz) Ham Radio 2M (144MHz) and of course FM Radio (88-108MHz)...
It sounds like their also considering opening up UHF channels, which could in theory offer lots of additional bandwidth even with the restrictions mentioned...
Slashdot Mirror
Gates was talking about spam from a users point of view not a technical one. Spam, for users, is not a big deal anymore because of how good spam filtering takes care of it. I get MUCH less spam delivered to my inbox (1 or 2) than I did 2 years ago (100+). My spam filter gets over 200 a day still, but it really doesn't impact me at all.
Funny, because both my hotmail (Microsoft) and my gmail (Google) accounts get LOTS of spam, but because of technology 99% of it gets filtered out.
So, in truth technology has made spam a thing of the past.
Not to be an asshole, but you do realize that there are different versions of Windows for servers, and that Microsoft isn't totally retarded... they could only push this setting to Windows 2000 Pro, or Windows XP.
If by "a little bit" you mean over $1 million, then yeah, I think if you've saved up A MILLION DOLLARS, you can give some back.
Nobody is saying your kids cant start off with a better life than you, but if you're giving them $1 MILLION, perhaps you can give some back to the people you fucked over to get that much money in the first place?
Do you even understand how GPS works?
The receivers figure out where they're at on t heir own. And then use software locally to display maps...
There is no way you can block an area in GPS short of just jamming the signal locally at that area.
As I learned today, do you plan on leaving your kids $2 Million (if you're married $4 Million)?? No? Well then this don't apply to you.
It applies to the richest of the rich, those who can afford to give away 2 Million dollars when they die.
Yes, those people diserve to pay for more of the pie, because they're eating more of it.
$2 Million? Holy shit.
Holy shit. You're nuts!
Thats just not true. These lies are told over and over, but they don't hold water.
For ONE, with the value of a business or farm, a bank would have no problem giving someone a loan to pay the tax on something. So, if you were given a $1m business, and the tax came to $300,000 you could simply take out a loan to pay that taxes. I'd call that a stupidity tax because there are so many ways around that its funny.
Family businesses are rarely sold to pay taxes. For one, the kids often sell the business to avoid having to run it, not to pay taxes. Also, any good accountant would tell the owner to run the business as a LLC which would be exempt from these rules because it is its own entity and not handed down like a sole business. You can reorg an existing business at any time, so there is no reason to use that as an excuse.
Secondly, there are less family farms because younger kids are realizing farming sucks and are moving to the city. Or their land is worth more sold to a large company (economy of scale) than for them to continue to farm it. Not because of taxes forcing them to sell it.
Please read my comment about starting a LLC. Apparently, your hatred for "The Man" means you're totally unprepared for starting your own business. If you think starting your own business means things like, no dress codes, no overtime, and vacations whenever you want, think again. Owning your own business means working hundreds of hours with little to no return, and sacrificing family or social time to make sure its a success.
Judging from your comments, I don't think you have to worry about handing it off...
The fact that Bush only won by a small margin didn't stop him from saying it was a mandate from God for him to continue running the country.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we need high enough taxes to pay for what we spend, or we've got to cut spending. Only an idiot like Shurb could think that we could CUT taxes (to the rich) and INCREASE spending (to make a profit for the rich).
What this country needs is a balanced budget amendment. Maybe the democrats will push that. Probably not... but if they cut funding to the war "of terror" at least it will curb spending somewhat.
Yeah, because when we die, we shouldn't have to give back anything to the country that supported us!
Personally, I'm all for the inheritance (aka: death) tax. You can't take it with you, and why shouldn't your estate have to pay something to the government? If you've managed to amass enough to hit the threshold where the tax comes in (what is it, $80,000 or something) after you die, you can afford give a little back.
Instead, we've got people who make minimum wage supporting the country, and those who are giving their grandkids $100,000 saying its too much to ask to give a little bit of that to the government.
Fine.
_ 8.html
I usually average 700KB/sec.
http://mail.planetcr.com:81/bandwidth/192.168.1.1
That's slightly lower because its going through my WiFi, but you get the idea.
$34.99 per month is 6mb/sec.
I pay $45.00 per month for that.
Of course you won't get fast speeds if your paying $14.95 per month. You get what you pay for. Most people have the fastest because its only a little bit more expensive.
Huh? The lowest price internet plan my cable company offers is 384k up and 6mb down. I usually average 700kb/s on downloads from anywhere decent.
I've never had an issue streaming DIVX encoded (MPEG-4) HD over my cable connection.
And I live in a town in Iowa, you're telling me that other cities don't have that??
That _might_ be. My previous employer got sued every winter as people would watch the temperature and as soon as it got down to like 30 degrees and started to ice up would decide that it was scary and time to go home.
Of course, they'd fall on their way to the car and sue, even though the employer didn't have time to do anything about it yet...
They usually won, too. Except for the one case where the person had commented to their co-worker that the wanted a year off, so they were going to run outside and "see what happened".
That's not true. If you don't salt the walkways and you have reason to believe they might be slippery, then you can be sued for negligence.
Especially if any of the renters ever complained that it was slippery. Then there would be proof that the landlord knew of the condition and actively neglected to do anything about it.
Common carrier is a total departure from the legal norm of being responsible for things even if you aren't aware of them.
That's knowing from the gut!
Wow, when I open that site I can only think "welcome to 1998".
:)
Animated gif - Check.
No CSS - Check.
Date that says last edited in 1998 - Check.
Heres been my theory on Electronic voting for awhile. Yes, the system is more expensive, but at some point we need to weigh the cost/benifit of true elections.
When people come in to vote, they're checked off the list by the front table, as is done today. They go to a booth with a machine, where they touch screen and cast their votes. The machine, then, prints off a sheet, with their votes in some sort of machine-readable barcodes, which are encrypted with a public key. This means that anyone could develop the equipment to read these codes (which is key to my next step) but actually creating them is much more difficult. The votes are also tabulated on a main system at this time.
They then take that sheet of barcodes to another station. This station is developed by a seperate company. They slide it in, and then look through a hood on a screen as their votes are decoded from the barcodes. They press a YES / NO button to "is this how you wanted to vote?" The sheet is then either stored away securely. This system also tabulates the votes on their own main system.
At the end of the night, both main systems vote numbers are compared. If there is a difference, they can check all the barcoded recipts that are stored away to verify the real count.
Of course, bonus points for all the systems running OSS software...
And how many times has America stepped in to one of those land battles and not totally f'ed things up. Besides times where we went in with assistance, like in WW2.
Why do you think America should decide that, instead of the people who's land Isreal stole?
For Maximum effiency you're currect, but there are such things as 1/4 wave antennas or 1/8th wave antennas. Many hand-held two way radios transmit on VHF and have antennas that are around 8 inches. Most LCD panels on laptops are large enough to hide that internally...
True enough, but there is data-bandwidth, and RF bandwidth. They're two seperate things, although they both use the same term.
It is not incorrect to say that a TV channel has 6MHz of bandwidth, although that is in the analog world. And QAM is not the most efficient, as we're putting about 45megabit into the 6MHz channels for OTA HD broadcasting...
But point taken.
American 802.11g has available bandwidth of 72MHz from Channel 1 to Channel 12. Worst case scenario, thats 3 non-overlapping channels at 54mb/sec each so 162megabits per second.
VHF TV is 12 channels that are 6 MHz each in width, so a total of... you guessed it, 72MHz! So, there is the same amount of bandwidth available in the VHF TV Spectrum with two additional benifits: VHF transmitters are MUCH cheaper than 2.4GHz stuff and also usually can crank out more power, and also VHF passes through walls much better.
The only caravat is that VHF TV spectrum isn't continual. From Channel 6 to Channel 7 is a large gap that fits all the aircraft bands (130Mhz) some pagers (150Mhz) Ham Radio 2M (144MHz) and of course FM Radio (88-108MHz)...
It sounds like their also considering opening up UHF channels, which could in theory offer lots of additional bandwidth even with the restrictions mentioned...
Nothing. And in fact, in this day and age, it seems a bit out of place. We've come to learn that communists are not evil!