Commies don't have to worry as much about public backlash from 3-eyed people. Look at the Soviet Union's nuclear research history. (True, the US did some dumb things, but not nearly in the same proportion.)
Turns out, we kept our markets open to Japanese cars while the Japanese were free to close their market to our cars. Totally unfair.
They did at first, in order to allow their local companies to get a footing. But now the real problem is that US cars don't sell well there because they are too big and not reliable enough. Japan has narrow roads. Plus, you need a certain sales volume to make service routine.
Japan had [only] 2 viable car companies that kicked the ass of our 3 in the 80s, Toyota and Honda. Nissan never kicked our asses in sales,
I meant collectively. Detroit was clearly caught off guard roughly around the disco era. That Toyota and Honda did the best in US doesn't change my point that more competition in Japan resulted in better cars.
think about this rationally. 700,000 were exposed; that's a tiny number. A Google search says that almost 139,000,000 voted. So that means that about 0.5%
Twitter was only one aspect of their campaign. They had a lot of fingers in different pies. We don't know the full extent yet, and may never know.
Many online services would be worse if their providers were smaller.
Bullshit. If there are a larger quantity of providers, they compete harder and customers have more choice. Japan had 7 viable car companies that kicked the ass of our 3 in the 80's.
The only place I see it being a problem is cross-country coverage. But the co's can make roaming deals with other carriers.
Oligopolies consistently have the worse customer service in surveys among different products that have fell under oligopolies/monopolies.
Geologists are concerned that the magnetic poles might soon go through one of their cyclic reversals, flipping north and south [and sometimes] no net magnetic field..."NULL".
The Earth runs on Java, how about that. We are F#&d
Tesla was biting off more than they could chew with auto-drive. Besides, if you want auto-drive, then you probably don't want a sports car. Sports cars are usually for people who like to drive.
Politicians can't resist creating laws that reward or punish specific behaviors (often with side-effects). Asking them to change that habit would be like asking them to balance budgets and think long-term. Expecting to fix human nature is asking too much. Reduce such behavior a bit perhaps, but without DNA changes, it will be minor.
But either way, my point about average tax rates stands.
Based on the data, most countries optimize their revenue by setting corporate tax rates at about half of what the US has had.
That's not true. Our corporate tax rates were about the same as Germany's and Japan's if you factor in loopholes actually used. Those are the two top-performing democracies in the world, besides US. If their rates are somehow "sub-optimal", it didn't hurt them enough to knock them from the top two positions.
Now, I'm not necessarily against lowering our corporate tax rates some, but we have to be mindful of the budget deficit. Fix that FIRST. And, GOP didn't have to lower personal tax rates for the rich. Their priorities are out of whack.
and people wonder why big government gets a bad rap. What a waste.
Humans are wasteful, period. I can give private-sector horror-stories also (Intel for example). If we burn everything that's wasteful or mismanaged, civilization would be charcoal. It's the "rid-because-imperfect" fallacy.
By the same logic, we would dismantle Wells Fargo Bank entirely after they massively tacked on service charges without asking customer permission.
Mistakes get made. Confess, fix, learn, and move on.
Pure BS! Apple has been sitting on yuuuuge piles of cash for many years. They could have given bonuses etc. to employees all that time.
It's as is you don't spend your cash if your cash-pile is only 7 miles high, but do when it hits 8. All these cash-rich companies announcing bonuses are just spreading trickle-down propaganda.
The Kansas tax-cut experiment has shown that general tax cuts hurt the budget far more than they help the economy, if any. The real test for this new "experiment" will be when a recession hits and we need a rainy-day infusion. What happened to all the fiscal conservatives who were so vocal before T?
I'm okay with a warning mechanism, such as yellow bar, or a pop-up confirmation that has a "do not show this message for this site any more" option. But to outright not allow, or repetitious prompts is too much. The little guy can't afford a fricken certificate.
Indeed. This article is limited in its overview. For one, there are different ways for music to be "complex". It can have complex melody, complex rhythm, complex textures, complex timing, and complex lyrics, for example.
As a general rule of composing and performance, you should not have all these factors be complex at the same time: it sounds like noisy mud. A few are into noisy-mud "modern art" sounds, but the rule stands the test of time for popular music. Human physiology cannot typically absorb that much complexity: you have to judiciously pick and choose what factors are complex and which are simple.
While I agree modern pop music is simpler melody-wise, it has more "texture", in part because there are more tools and synthesizers to do more things to sound. The total complexity has remained about the same, but the profile of the complexity of the factors has changed.
Similar change happened in the past. Baroque music was melodically complex and intricate. However, the rhythm was relatively simple. The early-middle classical era (around C. W. Gluck & Haydn's time) shifted to simpler melodies and less layering, but more complex timing. The pace slowed down and sped up in a more complex manner than baroque music. The baroque composer George Frideric Handel complained that the "new" style was "too simple". He wanted to kick the new composers off his lawn.
Strangers expect you to cover it. You can't hand out a URL to the article after you blast them with boogers. Well, you could try, but they'll think you are a, well, nerd, and some may even pop you one.
Slashdot Mirror
Commies don't have to worry as much about public backlash from 3-eyed people. Look at the Soviet Union's nuclear research history. (True, the US did some dumb things, but not nearly in the same proportion.)
psst, ad slogans are not intended for accuracy
"Nobody's got beaten over an Android"
I don't dispute they had protectionism. My point was that they had 7 car co's while we had 3.
Put him in the rocket also.
They did at first, in order to allow their local companies to get a footing. But now the real problem is that US cars don't sell well there because they are too big and not reliable enough. Japan has narrow roads. Plus, you need a certain sales volume to make service routine.
I meant collectively. Detroit was clearly caught off guard roughly around the disco era. That Toyota and Honda did the best in US doesn't change my point that more competition in Japan resulted in better cars.
Twitter was only one aspect of their campaign. They had a lot of fingers in different pies. We don't know the full extent yet, and may never know.
Bullshit. If there are a larger quantity of providers, they compete harder and customers have more choice. Japan had 7 viable car companies that kicked the ass of our 3 in the 80's.
The only place I see it being a problem is cross-country coverage. But the co's can make roaming deals with other carriers.
Oligopolies consistently have the worse customer service in surveys among different products that have fell under oligopolies/monopolies.
This is what happens when AI can't give "the finger"
Fake corporate news, who knew?
The Earth runs on Java, how about that. We are F#&d
Oligopolies and near monopolies almost always suck in the longer term. Without competition, Amazon will gradually grow dickier and dickier.
"Hey kid, here's Google..."
Tesla was biting off more than they could chew with auto-drive. Besides, if you want auto-drive, then you probably don't want a sports car. Sports cars are usually for people who like to drive.
Politicians can't resist creating laws that reward or punish specific behaviors (often with side-effects). Asking them to change that habit would be like asking them to balance budgets and think long-term. Expecting to fix human nature is asking too much. Reduce such behavior a bit perhaps, but without DNA changes, it will be minor.
But either way, my point about average tax rates stands.
No, because it's relative.
That's not true. Our corporate tax rates were about the same as Germany's and Japan's if you factor in loopholes actually used. Those are the two top-performing democracies in the world, besides US. If their rates are somehow "sub-optimal", it didn't hurt them enough to knock them from the top two positions.
Now, I'm not necessarily against lowering our corporate tax rates some, but we have to be mindful of the budget deficit. Fix that FIRST. And, GOP didn't have to lower personal tax rates for the rich. Their priorities are out of whack.
Humans are wasteful, period. I can give private-sector horror-stories also (Intel for example). If we burn everything that's wasteful or mismanaged, civilization would be charcoal. It's the "rid-because-imperfect" fallacy.
By the same logic, we would dismantle Wells Fargo Bank entirely after they massively tacked on service charges without asking customer permission.
Mistakes get made. Confess, fix, learn, and move on.
Pure BS! Apple has been sitting on yuuuuge piles of cash for many years. They could have given bonuses etc. to employees all that time.
It's as is you don't spend your cash if your cash-pile is only 7 miles high, but do when it hits 8. All these cash-rich companies announcing bonuses are just spreading trickle-down propaganda.
The Kansas tax-cut experiment has shown that general tax cuts hurt the budget far more than they help the economy, if any. The real test for this new "experiment" will be when a recession hits and we need a rainy-day infusion. What happened to all the fiscal conservatives who were so vocal before T?
I'm okay with a warning mechanism, such as yellow bar, or a pop-up confirmation that has a "do not show this message for this site any more" option. But to outright not allow, or repetitious prompts is too much. The little guy can't afford a fricken certificate.
You dirty brother, you killed my rat!
Indeed. This article is limited in its overview. For one, there are different ways for music to be "complex". It can have complex melody, complex rhythm, complex textures, complex timing, and complex lyrics, for example.
As a general rule of composing and performance, you should not have all these factors be complex at the same time: it sounds like noisy mud. A few are into noisy-mud "modern art" sounds, but the rule stands the test of time for popular music. Human physiology cannot typically absorb that much complexity: you have to judiciously pick and choose what factors are complex and which are simple.
While I agree modern pop music is simpler melody-wise, it has more "texture", in part because there are more tools and synthesizers to do more things to sound. The total complexity has remained about the same, but the profile of the complexity of the factors has changed.
Similar change happened in the past. Baroque music was melodically complex and intricate. However, the rhythm was relatively simple. The early-middle classical era (around C. W. Gluck & Haydn's time) shifted to simpler melodies and less layering, but more complex timing. The pace slowed down and sped up in a more complex manner than baroque music. The baroque composer George Frideric Handel complained that the "new" style was "too simple". He wanted to kick the new composers off his lawn.
Change is the same as it ever was.
Convert to Orangelam, science is a lie! The Earth is flat and that's how you should wear your toupee.
Strangers expect you to cover it. You can't hand out a URL to the article after you blast them with boogers. Well, you could try, but they'll think you are a, well, nerd, and some may even pop you one.