It's not the complicated. It's what they're spending their money and what we're spending our money on. It could be considered socialist to spend money on weapons technology, if there were such massive poverty levels in the US and people weren't being asked to go without to allow billionaires to have a few more million dollars.
As for bailing out Wall Street, they were basically taking the country's economy ransom for billions of dollars.
Normally, the point of this is to keep defense contractors in business when there isn't a war on, or to develop future technology. The problem isn't that we're doing it, the problem is that we're borrowing massive amounts of money to do it, even as we spend massive amounts of money on superfluous wars.
I think this Simpsons quote pretty well sums it up:
Kodos: It looks like the Earthlings won.
Kang: Did they? Right now they have a board with a nail in it. But they won't stop there. Soon they will make bigger boards with bigger nails until they make a board with a nail in it so big it will destroy them all!
I think the problem is that there's a lot of folks here that don't think we're winning by enough. They're willing to chuck all quality of life down the crapper in order to get a modicum of security. At least measures like this actually provide some of that, unlike the other things.
There's a lot of paranoia in the US, and the people that vote for candidates the promise to cut taxes won't vote for anybody that's not going to increase the defense budget let alone cut it down to size.
And as such this is what you get. We in the US spend more than most of the rest of the world combined on our military.
Indeed, and for it to really work, you'd also have to be really certain that the person can be trusted. This is just a way of making it even more inconvenient to try and smuggle information out. Sometimes the right solution isn't particularly high tech. It's amazing how much more secure you can make a system with a bit of epoxy applied to the right spots.
That's more a matter of Apple not allowing the carrier to use a custom interface. The main reason why it takes so long for a lot of those phones to get the latest release, is that the carrier feels the need to include a custom interface.
That's an incredibly easy thing to solve, all you do is put the CPU into some sort of protective case that prevents a person from inserting or removing things from any of the ports without the proper key.
You then keep the key in one of those industrial key minders that comes complete with logging.
You can squirt epoxy in the front ones, and then use an enclosure that keeps the fingers away from the back ones without the right key, and probably some sort of tamper proof sticker to make it that much harder to do without being caught.
But really, as soon as you allow physical contact you've blown security, this stuff is about making it as inconvenient as possible for an authorized party to be up to no good with console access.
I might be missing something, but the iPod touch isn't a phone. And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it. Right now they're making phones and are moving into the tablet market. And they're making moves on netbooks as well.
And don't forget about Google TV. Seems like trying to compete with the iPod touch would be a distraction, and they haven't demonstrated any interest in it up to this point.
Indeed. Personally, I like how Google handles it on the Nexus One. Attempting to unlock it pops up a screen explaining that if you continue unlocking it that they are no longer responsible for what the software does. Which is fair enough, if they no longer have any control over the software, then it's a reasonable trade off.
But with the Android phones there's little reason to unlock it, unless one wants to run a custom UI, as you can already convenient install apps from elsewhere.
That's my thought. There's an awful lot of insider trading and trading on future prices that goes on at hedge funds. There may or may not be any that do it via legitimate smarts, but there's a lot of them that do things which intentionally distort the market.
I'd personally feel very differently if Wall Street was anything other than a bunch of speculators that are fine losing all of your money even as they give themselves bonuses for handling the money.
It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. There's still a huge shift of pension plans from defined benefits to defined contribution plans, and that almost certainly will mean more individual investors to get taken to the cleaners by Wall Street firms.
You've been lied to. It's a bit like saying that the guy with the X-ray specs who wants to play poker is good for the game because it means that you don't have to wait for somebody else to fill out the quartet.
The problem is that while he does indeed have money, he also has X-ray specs which allow for him to have an unfair advantage over the other players.
High frequency trading is ultimately a scourge, the mechanic they use is a bit of sleight of hand to take advantage of momentary price fluctuations which leave them in the position where they're able to slam in an order for a guaranteed future profit, where other investors are locked out. It's something that I could do as well, if I were told what the price would be in the future and had the means of slamming in a bid in time to capitalize on it. There's little value to that sort of high finance piracy.
Even without that behavior, there's plenty of liquidity, the high frequency trading tends to target portions of the market, not the market as a whole, and even smaller trading stocks, there's typically plenty of liquidity for reasonable players.
No, he's correct about that. High frequency trading and technical analysis are trading strategies that don't depend upon the underlying company to make money. High frequency trading is worse because of the way that it works.
Unlike technical analysis which relies extensively on group think, high freqency trading, relies upon the knowledge of what the future price for a share is going to be and then slams in a trade that will, assuming it gets there in time, result in guaranteed profit.
It's basically a continuation of a practice which used to be pretty common. Stock brokers would have access to the price of company shares the next day and would be able to act upon that information in a way that the general public wouldn't.
The TL;DR version, high frequency trading is parasitic and needs to be stopped for the good of the market.
I'm wondering what Oracle's angle is on this. They haven't been particularly concerned with developers walking out in a mass exodus. Or is it just a matter of it looking really bad for them to lose that support?
Probably not, at least not on the surface. The problem is that a significant portion of the wear and tear is from the surface rubbing off. It might help some, but doubtful that it would be enough to make it worthwhile.
I hope so, given that they aren't subject to copyright protection. At best they'd be looking at patent suits, and lets face it, they'd be suing even before the plans went online if they could.
All Autodesk software is free to students- and the licenses last for several years now. If you are too poor to take an online class or a continuing education class at the local community college, then it probably isn't too hard to just say you are a student and get your free software legally.
That's not true, the software is still a couple hundred dollars, unless the institution happens to pay for a site license that allows the students to install it on their machines.
That's not subject to copyright law. It's a trade secret, but the parts are not subjected to copyright, and neither are the plans. It's not anymore subject to copyright than the results of last nights sports game.
And the machine path is even less protected than the designs are. It's governed based upon the rules of physics, not creativity and finding an efficient way of doing it is in and of itself a spur to innovation.
Precisely, there are enough cowards and morons out there that things are unlikely to get any better any time soon via democracy. It's a shame that we wasted our poll tax and voting requirements trying to keep black people from voting, when we could've used it to keep stupid people and cowards from voting.
It's perfectly legitimate to have many different views, but when they're primarily driven by emotion without any consideration, that's dangerous.
Re:The most successful trolls
on
Angles On Anonymous
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
Except that unlike the Tea Party movement they've got the collective brains to select a name that actually relates to them. Plus, they're significantly less hypocritical. I don't recall Anonymous spending any meaningful time trying to pretend that they're something they aren't.
They could do that, but under the system, crackers could also just poison the cache or redirect DNS traffic to a rogue DNS server. As bad as the US government has been lately with regards to interfering with the internet, they're far better than having nobody in charge at all, or leaving things open to random crackery.
Slashdot Mirror
Because it's not like our allies spy on us.
It's not the complicated. It's what they're spending their money and what we're spending our money on. It could be considered socialist to spend money on weapons technology, if there were such massive poverty levels in the US and people weren't being asked to go without to allow billionaires to have a few more million dollars.
As for bailing out Wall Street, they were basically taking the country's economy ransom for billions of dollars.
Normally, the point of this is to keep defense contractors in business when there isn't a war on, or to develop future technology. The problem isn't that we're doing it, the problem is that we're borrowing massive amounts of money to do it, even as we spend massive amounts of money on superfluous wars.
I think this Simpsons quote pretty well sums it up:
Kodos: It looks like the Earthlings won.
Kang: Did they? Right now they have a board with a nail in it. But they won't stop there. Soon they will make bigger boards with bigger nails until they make a board with a nail in it so big it will destroy them all!
I think the problem is that there's a lot of folks here that don't think we're winning by enough. They're willing to chuck all quality of life down the crapper in order to get a modicum of security. At least measures like this actually provide some of that, unlike the other things.
There's a lot of paranoia in the US, and the people that vote for candidates the promise to cut taxes won't vote for anybody that's not going to increase the defense budget let alone cut it down to size.
And as such this is what you get. We in the US spend more than most of the rest of the world combined on our military.
Eh, is letting lawyers make purely technical decisions really that much worse than letting the accountants or the non-IT managers do it?
Indeed, and for it to really work, you'd also have to be really certain that the person can be trusted. This is just a way of making it even more inconvenient to try and smuggle information out. Sometimes the right solution isn't particularly high tech. It's amazing how much more secure you can make a system with a bit of epoxy applied to the right spots.
That's more a matter of Apple not allowing the carrier to use a custom interface. The main reason why it takes so long for a lot of those phones to get the latest release, is that the carrier feels the need to include a custom interface.
That's an incredibly easy thing to solve, all you do is put the CPU into some sort of protective case that prevents a person from inserting or removing things from any of the ports without the proper key.
You then keep the key in one of those industrial key minders that comes complete with logging.
You can squirt epoxy in the front ones, and then use an enclosure that keeps the fingers away from the back ones without the right key, and probably some sort of tamper proof sticker to make it that much harder to do without being caught.
But really, as soon as you allow physical contact you've blown security, this stuff is about making it as inconvenient as possible for an authorized party to be up to no good with console access.
I might be missing something, but the iPod touch isn't a phone. And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it. Right now they're making phones and are moving into the tablet market. And they're making moves on netbooks as well.
And don't forget about Google TV. Seems like trying to compete with the iPod touch would be a distraction, and they haven't demonstrated any interest in it up to this point.
Indeed. Personally, I like how Google handles it on the Nexus One. Attempting to unlock it pops up a screen explaining that if you continue unlocking it that they are no longer responsible for what the software does. Which is fair enough, if they no longer have any control over the software, then it's a reasonable trade off.
But with the Android phones there's little reason to unlock it, unless one wants to run a custom UI, as you can already convenient install apps from elsewhere.
That's my thought. There's an awful lot of insider trading and trading on future prices that goes on at hedge funds. There may or may not be any that do it via legitimate smarts, but there's a lot of them that do things which intentionally distort the market.
I'd personally feel very differently if Wall Street was anything other than a bunch of speculators that are fine losing all of your money even as they give themselves bonuses for handling the money.
It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. There's still a huge shift of pension plans from defined benefits to defined contribution plans, and that almost certainly will mean more individual investors to get taken to the cleaners by Wall Street firms.
You've been lied to. It's a bit like saying that the guy with the X-ray specs who wants to play poker is good for the game because it means that you don't have to wait for somebody else to fill out the quartet.
The problem is that while he does indeed have money, he also has X-ray specs which allow for him to have an unfair advantage over the other players.
High frequency trading is ultimately a scourge, the mechanic they use is a bit of sleight of hand to take advantage of momentary price fluctuations which leave them in the position where they're able to slam in an order for a guaranteed future profit, where other investors are locked out. It's something that I could do as well, if I were told what the price would be in the future and had the means of slamming in a bid in time to capitalize on it. There's little value to that sort of high finance piracy.
Even without that behavior, there's plenty of liquidity, the high frequency trading tends to target portions of the market, not the market as a whole, and even smaller trading stocks, there's typically plenty of liquidity for reasonable players.
No, he's correct about that. High frequency trading and technical analysis are trading strategies that don't depend upon the underlying company to make money. High frequency trading is worse because of the way that it works.
Unlike technical analysis which relies extensively on group think, high freqency trading, relies upon the knowledge of what the future price for a share is going to be and then slams in a trade that will, assuming it gets there in time, result in guaranteed profit.
It's basically a continuation of a practice which used to be pretty common. Stock brokers would have access to the price of company shares the next day and would be able to act upon that information in a way that the general public wouldn't.
The TL;DR version, high frequency trading is parasitic and needs to be stopped for the good of the market.
I'm wondering what Oracle's angle is on this. They haven't been particularly concerned with developers walking out in a mass exodus. Or is it just a matter of it looking really bad for them to lose that support?
Probably not, at least not on the surface. The problem is that a significant portion of the wear and tear is from the surface rubbing off. It might help some, but doubtful that it would be enough to make it worthwhile.
I hope so, given that they aren't subject to copyright protection. At best they'd be looking at patent suits, and lets face it, they'd be suing even before the plans went online if they could.
All Autodesk software is free to students- and the licenses last for several years now. If you are too poor to take an online class or a continuing education class at the local community college, then it probably isn't too hard to just say you are a student and get your free software legally.
That's not true, the software is still a couple hundred dollars, unless the institution happens to pay for a site license that allows the students to install it on their machines.
That's not subject to copyright law. It's a trade secret, but the parts are not subjected to copyright, and neither are the plans. It's not anymore subject to copyright than the results of last nights sports game.
And the machine path is even less protected than the designs are. It's governed based upon the rules of physics, not creativity and finding an efficient way of doing it is in and of itself a spur to innovation.
Precisely, there are enough cowards and morons out there that things are unlikely to get any better any time soon via democracy. It's a shame that we wasted our poll tax and voting requirements trying to keep black people from voting, when we could've used it to keep stupid people and cowards from voting.
It's perfectly legitimate to have many different views, but when they're primarily driven by emotion without any consideration, that's dangerous.
Except that unlike the Tea Party movement they've got the collective brains to select a name that actually relates to them. Plus, they're significantly less hypocritical. I don't recall Anonymous spending any meaningful time trying to pretend that they're something they aren't.
I assume you're joking, but it's the TLD, unless those other things are suddenly requiring DNS look ups.
They could do that, but under the system, crackers could also just poison the cache or redirect DNS traffic to a rogue DNS server. As bad as the US government has been lately with regards to interfering with the internet, they're far better than having nobody in charge at all, or leaving things open to random crackery.