Thanks for the extra and updated info. When I tried using Skype, it was at least a year ago, maybe two. If that has changed since then, that's great and probably good for the submitter!
In my defense, the post wasn't "complete garbage" in that it was true. The fact that you could apparently get the VOIP port unblocked by calling customer service was not well known or promoted by Clearwire, while most customer service forums had numerous complaints about blocked traffic. My post could use some more up-to-date info though, so thanks for fixing that for me.
I use Clearwire's regular wireless internet here in Seattle. They block Skype traffic to promote their own VIOP plan for an extra $10-15/month. They might not let you use your netbook as a cell phone without ponying up extra $$.
A few posts down is the end of a very famous and highly-regarded WoW blogger. He realized that he had completely neglected his wife and son for years. WoW was his "mistress" and he was an addict, like your friend. Tell him "Don't be like this guy." This guy would easily tell you that real people are a lot more important than the game. As soon as that game goes end-of-life, what will he have? Not even a friend.
If he doesn't respond, you and your housemates ought to save his life -- not an exaggeration. Find a way to cut off his connection to the Internet at the house. Hide his mouse. Remove his power cable, or cut the fuses to that part of the house. Let him borrow your computer for whatever he needs to do for homework.
He may hate you, but you are doing the right thing. He may not see it, but his vision is clearly messed up. Best of luck to you.
I did the same search. It asked me if I wanted to try the same search for a European swallow instead, with a result of 25mph, with conversions to many other units of measure. Now we know.
Understand it that is a natural environment *response* to an unnatural influx of carbon dioxide from humans.
I don't think the influx of carbon dioxide from humans is "unnatural". We do think of factories, automobiles, and other sources of pollution as unnatural, but this comes from a wrong understanding of what is natural. For humans, our natural habitat is man-made. While nothing else in nature builds skyscrapers like we do, it is what we do naturally. It may not be in nature, but it is in our nature. Our habitat is our modern lifestyle. Tribes living in huts in South America are not living anymore "naturally" than we are in the developed world.
While I agree that we are putting a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere, it isn't unnatural. Most people just don't get that natural doesn't mean "life as it was before humans started mucking up the planet".
He's trying to unlock an achievement: Consecutive Days with Duplicate posts. Generally reserved for editors, also applicable to the common slashdotter.
Unfortunately, he wasn't logged in, so this won't count.
I much prefer Sousaphone Hero myself. Leaves me a little breathless though, but I'm sure it's a good warm-up for whatever MS is pushing here.
Re:Terror and getting killed not directly linked.
on
Making a Horror Game Scary
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Mod Parent Up
Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem was a very scary game to play. It's standout feature was its Sanity Meter, and when that dipped low you'd get all kinds of effects in game as well as ones that broke the fourth wall like fake error messages from the GameCube. As your Sanity meter dipped lower, things would start to change, like fake enemies, blood dripping on the walls, the camera angle wobbling, the screen blurring, your body exploding while casting a spell, a roach on the TV screen -- very scary and creepy. Nintendo's first M-rated game deserves a nod here.
You need some sort of policy measure that addresses the breakdown in aggregate demand. Otherwise, you've got nothing but old slogans.
You cannot address aggregate demand through government spending what the people don't have. It the money is simply printed to boost spending, this creates inflation and devalues the dollar. For every dollar that is created, every dollar buys less than it could before. Prices go up, but wages have not, so everything becomes less affordable -- except for those who receive the stimulus. Everyone else is just that much poorer collectively.
If the banks are hoarding cash, then the problem isn't with aggregate demand, but liquidity and debt. The bank has every incentive to put that money to good use and make more money for the bank. If sitting on that cash is the best use they have for it, then the problem is debt and liquidity. Lets not make the debt problem worse by creating even more. We've tried Keynesian stimulus since WWII, and it has never fixed our problems (just look at the record deficits and national debt). Yet we always turn to it as a solution. Did we ever stop to think that this may actually be the problem?
Actually, both of you hit two heads of the same nail/
That has to be the oddest analogy I have seen yet on Slashdot. I have never heard of a two-headed nail, nor can I really conceive why such a nail would be at all better than the standard one-headed nail.
But taking into account your 4-digit ID, perhaps you are old enough to remember a time when we used two-headed nails and were lucky to have them, or were grateful for them, or something like that.
I think a tax vacation would be a great idea. Clearly the government thinks giving money back in the form of various stimulus payments or TARP payouts is good for the economy, and most people agree.
My follow-up question is this: if it is so good for the economy and nation to give Americans their money back, why did the government take it in the first place?
That TV is a 14" screen - smaller than what most people use right now. I'm guessing the average family wants sometime in the range of 21"-32". Some quotes from the reviews on the same page:
I bought the original to put in my RV, so the 2nd one is going into my home as our bedroom TV
Sound quality is on par with the size of the set - in other words the sound is "small", but so is the picture.
We use this tv on the patio... The sound quality is just average and is the weak point of the unit.
And these are all from 4 and 5 star reviews. Clearly not a set I want for my family - can you imagine playing a multiplayer game on this set?
There are very rarely any cheap/undervalued stocks nowadays.
I think a recession is a terrible time to say that there are very rarely any cheap/undervalued stocks nowadays. I have recently bought a fair bit of stock when the DOW was between 8,300 and 8,500. These are long-term investments and at great prices. I was lucky not to have invested at all before the recession aside from my employer's 401(k) and had substantial savings. Now I have the beginnings of a nice retirement nest egg, plus dividends.
With all the distros out there vying for this, I'm sure this will end up being like Spartacus.
User: Which one of you is Linux?
Ubuntu: I am Linux!
Gentoo: No, I am Linux!
Red Hat: No, I am Linux!
SuSE: Don't listen to them - I am Linux!
Shouts from Slackware, YellowDog, DamnSmallLinux and thousands of others fill the air.
Perhaps on a small scale, this could be useful. But I certainly don't want it to become a system of government. The last thing I want to see is something like the Bill of Rights being "flagged as inappropriate".
I think that we could (and sort of do) teach early algebra at a much younger age than we currently do. I remember learning to do math with those sheets of fill-in-the-box equations. Something like a long list of:
3 + 5 = [ ]
2 * [ ] = 8
[ ] - 15 = 6
All we have to do is replace the boxes with letters, then ask them what number the letter would be. Conceptually, I don't see how it is very different from using a box.
If such a stimulus would do so much good for so many, why did the Government take it via taxes in the first place?
Except they didn't really take the $700 billion. They're creating it out of nothing. This isn't a transfer of wealth, it is a transfer of debt from the individual to the federal government. I don't want the government taking money I have been very careful to save to bail out those who can't be trusted to use it wisely.
How much do we pay volunteers to do the same thing? How much do we pay inmates to do it? I think those would be relevant figures to compare what we should pay students for the same work.
I would like to correct your math on McCain's health plan (not advocating for or against it). He is not taking "another $12000 in NEW taxes".
The plan is to take your health benefits you receive from your employer and classify them as taxable income. The worth of the benefits may vary from company to company, but the highest figure I've heard thrown around is that $12,000 you mentioned. You would be taxed on that amount based on your tax bracket. For example, if you were in a 15% tax bracket, those health benefits would add $1,800 to your tax bill. For a 35% bracket, this would add $4,200 to your bill. McCain says he will help you pay for this with the tax credit of $2,500 for a single person or $5,000 per family. The tax credit offsets the increased tax you pay.
You're right, it doesn't do much about insurance companies. But it does more to encourage a single-payer system by making it easier for people to purchase individual health insurance plans apart from their employer. Companies still get to pay for their coverage with pre-tax dollars, so they still have a tax incentive to provide health care. Some may opt not to cover their employees anymore because of this change, but certainly not all companies. Healthcare is still a great perk to recruit better employees.
After RTFA (I know, breaking the unspoken rules here) I think the test isn't very conclusive. It looks like, instead of having a single conversation and deciding "Bot or Not?(TM)", the tester had simultaneous conversations and had to decide which was the human and which was the bot. FTA:
Hence yesterday's Turing Test, in which human judges simultaneously conversed with an "artificial conversational entity" such as Eugene and a "hidden human" for five minutes. If more than 30 per cent of judges mistook the programme for the human, the programme would have passed Turing's test, thus beginning a new age of thinking machines.
So you had to pick which was which. That means that the human could respond in such a way as to look like a computer instead. That doesn't test whether the AI can fool 30% to think it is human, just that it is more human than the real person. All the human has to do is respond more like what people think AI would say than the AI does. I'll wait until we can get a less biased test before I am willing to concede any victory here.
What the left ISN'T answering is the question of "who bears teh burden for paying the taxes and paying off the debt...". The answer may surprise you: the rich do.
As far as personal income tax goes, the top 1% of income earners, the very rich, paid nearly 40% of all the income tax collected in 2006, whereas the bottom 50% (making less than $32,000 annually) paid only 3%. I believe the current threshold for paying no taxes is the bottom 38%. The top 25%, who made $64,702 or more, paid 86% of the income tax collected. In short, the people who are going to pay for all of the debt incurred will be the rich, unless things change dramatically.
But how much of what the government takes in comes from the tax payer? According to Wikipedia, $1.25 trillion dollars of the total $2.66 trillion came from income taxes. Another $927.2 billion came from Social Security and other payroll taxes, which we could split half and half between people and their employer. People also paid the $25.7 billion in estate and gift taxes. Corporations paid only $314.9 billion. Taxes on the people, then, would make up 65% of the federal budget. So when those debts come due, the people are going to pay for it. But since the lower 75% of all tax payers make up 13.7% of all taxes paid, they won't see the big hit -- the rich will.
The left can certainly see what the government can do when given tons of money and power, as based on the current approval ratings of Congress and the President, almost no one is happy about their actions. So why would they insist on giving the government more of our money and more power when they can't be responsible with what they already take? If you want them to be more responsible (or you want to take away some of their power to wage those wars and drive up the debt) vote for lower taxes and less spending.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the extra and updated info. When I tried using Skype, it was at least a year ago, maybe two. If that has changed since then, that's great and probably good for the submitter!
In my defense, the post wasn't "complete garbage" in that it was true. The fact that you could apparently get the VOIP port unblocked by calling customer service was not well known or promoted by Clearwire, while most customer service forums had numerous complaints about blocked traffic. My post could use some more up-to-date info though, so thanks for fixing that for me.
I use Clearwire's regular wireless internet here in Seattle. They block Skype traffic to promote their own VIOP plan for an extra $10-15/month. They might not let you use your netbook as a cell phone without ponying up extra $$.
Have him read this:
Big Red Kitty: Farewell and Thank You
A few posts down is the end of a very famous and highly-regarded WoW blogger. He realized that he had completely neglected his wife and son for years. WoW was his "mistress" and he was an addict, like your friend. Tell him "Don't be like this guy." This guy would easily tell you that real people are a lot more important than the game. As soon as that game goes end-of-life, what will he have? Not even a friend.
If he doesn't respond, you and your housemates ought to save his life -- not an exaggeration. Find a way to cut off his connection to the Internet at the house. Hide his mouse. Remove his power cable, or cut the fuses to that part of the house. Let him borrow your computer for whatever he needs to do for homework.
He may hate you, but you are doing the right thing. He may not see it, but his vision is clearly messed up. Best of luck to you.
I did the same search. It asked me if I wanted to try the same search for a European swallow instead, with a result of 25mph, with conversions to many other units of measure. Now we know.
Understand it that is a natural environment *response* to an unnatural influx of carbon dioxide from humans.
I don't think the influx of carbon dioxide from humans is "unnatural". We do think of factories, automobiles, and other sources of pollution as unnatural, but this comes from a wrong understanding of what is natural. For humans, our natural habitat is man-made. While nothing else in nature builds skyscrapers like we do, it is what we do naturally. It may not be in nature, but it is in our nature. Our habitat is our modern lifestyle. Tribes living in huts in South America are not living anymore "naturally" than we are in the developed world.
While I agree that we are putting a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere, it isn't unnatural. Most people just don't get that natural doesn't mean "life as it was before humans started mucking up the planet".
I won't call it complete until they place a tombstone in honor of Mankrik's wife, dead all these years and still not buried.
He's trying to unlock an achievement: Consecutive Days with Duplicate posts. Generally reserved for editors, also applicable to the common slashdotter.
Unfortunately, he wasn't logged in, so this won't count.
I much prefer Sousaphone Hero myself. Leaves me a little breathless though, but I'm sure it's a good warm-up for whatever MS is pushing here.
Mod Parent Up Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem was a very scary game to play. It's standout feature was its Sanity Meter, and when that dipped low you'd get all kinds of effects in game as well as ones that broke the fourth wall like fake error messages from the GameCube. As your Sanity meter dipped lower, things would start to change, like fake enemies, blood dripping on the walls, the camera angle wobbling, the screen blurring, your body exploding while casting a spell, a roach on the TV screen -- very scary and creepy. Nintendo's first M-rated game deserves a nod here.
You need some sort of policy measure that addresses the breakdown in aggregate demand. Otherwise, you've got nothing but old slogans.
You cannot address aggregate demand through government spending what the people don't have. It the money is simply printed to boost spending, this creates inflation and devalues the dollar. For every dollar that is created, every dollar buys less than it could before. Prices go up, but wages have not, so everything becomes less affordable -- except for those who receive the stimulus. Everyone else is just that much poorer collectively.
If the banks are hoarding cash, then the problem isn't with aggregate demand, but liquidity and debt. The bank has every incentive to put that money to good use and make more money for the bank. If sitting on that cash is the best use they have for it, then the problem is debt and liquidity. Lets not make the debt problem worse by creating even more. We've tried Keynesian stimulus since WWII, and it has never fixed our problems (just look at the record deficits and national debt). Yet we always turn to it as a solution. Did we ever stop to think that this may actually be the problem?
Actually, both of you hit two heads of the same nail/
That has to be the oddest analogy I have seen yet on Slashdot. I have never heard of a two-headed nail, nor can I really conceive why such a nail would be at all better than the standard one-headed nail.
But taking into account your 4-digit ID, perhaps you are old enough to remember a time when we used two-headed nails and were lucky to have them, or were grateful for them, or something like that.
I think a tax vacation would be a great idea. Clearly the government thinks giving money back in the form of various stimulus payments or TARP payouts is good for the economy, and most people agree.
My follow-up question is this: if it is so good for the economy and nation to give Americans their money back, why did the government take it in the first place?
And these are all from 4 and 5 star reviews. Clearly not a set I want for my family - can you imagine playing a multiplayer game on this set?
There are very rarely any cheap/undervalued stocks nowadays.
I think a recession is a terrible time to say that there are very rarely any cheap/undervalued stocks nowadays. I have recently bought a fair bit of stock when the DOW was between 8,300 and 8,500. These are long-term investments and at great prices. I was lucky not to have invested at all before the recession aside from my employer's 401(k) and had substantial savings. Now I have the beginnings of a nice retirement nest egg, plus dividends.
With all the distros out there vying for this, I'm sure this will end up being like Spartacus.
User: Which one of you is Linux?
Ubuntu: I am Linux!
Gentoo: No, I am Linux!
Red Hat: No, I am Linux!
SuSE: Don't listen to them - I am Linux!
Shouts from Slackware, YellowDog, DamnSmallLinux and thousands of others fill the air.
There are no absolutes
Except that one. How does that work?
Perhaps on a small scale, this could be useful. But I certainly don't want it to become a system of government. The last thing I want to see is something like the Bill of Rights being "flagged as inappropriate".
I think that we could (and sort of do) teach early algebra at a much younger age than we currently do. I remember learning to do math with those sheets of fill-in-the-box equations. Something like a long list of:
3 + 5 = [ ]
2 * [ ] = 8
[ ] - 15 = 6
All we have to do is replace the boxes with letters, then ask them what number the letter would be. Conceptually, I don't see how it is very different from using a box.
Update - 12/5 at 00:04 by SS
Wow, that's amazing! It's only just after 4:15pm on Dec. 4th local time. Time travel really is possible!
If such a stimulus would do so much good for so many, why did the Government take it via taxes in the first place?
Except they didn't really take the $700 billion. They're creating it out of nothing. This isn't a transfer of wealth, it is a transfer of debt from the individual to the federal government. I don't want the government taking money I have been very careful to save to bail out those who can't be trusted to use it wisely.
How much do we pay volunteers to do the same thing? How much do we pay inmates to do it? I think those would be relevant figures to compare what we should pay students for the same work.
the president-elect has launched a website to lay out his plans for government reform (letting us know what we should expect in the coming term)
He's campaigned for 2 years. Shouldn't we already know what his plans are?
I would like to correct your math on McCain's health plan (not advocating for or against it). He is not taking "another $12000 in NEW taxes".
The plan is to take your health benefits you receive from your employer and classify them as taxable income. The worth of the benefits may vary from company to company, but the highest figure I've heard thrown around is that $12,000 you mentioned. You would be taxed on that amount based on your tax bracket. For example, if you were in a 15% tax bracket, those health benefits would add $1,800 to your tax bill. For a 35% bracket, this would add $4,200 to your bill. McCain says he will help you pay for this with the tax credit of $2,500 for a single person or $5,000 per family. The tax credit offsets the increased tax you pay.
You're right, it doesn't do much about insurance companies. But it does more to encourage a single-payer system by making it easier for people to purchase individual health insurance plans apart from their employer. Companies still get to pay for their coverage with pre-tax dollars, so they still have a tax incentive to provide health care. Some may opt not to cover their employees anymore because of this change, but certainly not all companies. Healthcare is still a great perk to recruit better employees.
Hence yesterday's Turing Test, in which human judges simultaneously conversed with an "artificial conversational entity" such as Eugene and a "hidden human" for five minutes. If more than 30 per cent of judges mistook the programme for the human, the programme would have passed Turing's test, thus beginning a new age of thinking machines.
So you had to pick which was which. That means that the human could respond in such a way as to look like a computer instead. That doesn't test whether the AI can fool 30% to think it is human, just that it is more human than the real person. All the human has to do is respond more like what people think AI would say than the AI does. I'll wait until we can get a less biased test before I am willing to concede any victory here.
What the left ISN'T answering is the question of "who bears teh burden for paying the taxes and paying off the debt...". The answer may surprise you: the rich do.
As far as personal income tax goes, the top 1% of income earners, the very rich, paid nearly 40% of all the income tax collected in 2006, whereas the bottom 50% (making less than $32,000 annually) paid only 3%. I believe the current threshold for paying no taxes is the bottom 38%. The top 25%, who made $64,702 or more, paid 86% of the income tax collected. In short, the people who are going to pay for all of the debt incurred will be the rich, unless things change dramatically.
But how much of what the government takes in comes from the tax payer? According to Wikipedia, $1.25 trillion dollars of the total $2.66 trillion came from income taxes. Another $927.2 billion came from Social Security and other payroll taxes, which we could split half and half between people and their employer. People also paid the $25.7 billion in estate and gift taxes. Corporations paid only $314.9 billion. Taxes on the people, then, would make up 65% of the federal budget. So when those debts come due, the people are going to pay for it. But since the lower 75% of all tax payers make up 13.7% of all taxes paid, they won't see the big hit -- the rich will.
The left can certainly see what the government can do when given tons of money and power, as based on the current approval ratings of Congress and the President, almost no one is happy about their actions. So why would they insist on giving the government more of our money and more power when they can't be responsible with what they already take? If you want them to be more responsible (or you want to take away some of their power to wage those wars and drive up the debt) vote for lower taxes and less spending.