No, Apple wins. Because there is competition between apps, and some app publishers will decide pay the 30% tax and make it easier for customers, and they might get more paying users that way.
It's like those immensely profitable companies bleating that their money is "trapped" overseas and they can't use it to "invest" in the USA. No it isn't trapped at all, just pay the taxes.
App was making it easy for people to order a sandwich from Brown's cafeteria. Somehow Brown thought that was offensive and something to be stopped.
App makers respond by making it easy for people to order a similar sandwich from a different restaurant not run by Brown University. University goes apoplectic, presumably offended that the app maker didn't go out of business immediately.
"What the fuck was NASA thinking when it complied?"
These idiots are in control of the future of our entire space program and get their panties all twisted because of something stupid and trivial, but if we anger them they may start cutting billions out of spite.
I'm not a chemist either but fortunately somebody who is working on it is.
Munger also reported the problems with the connector pins, which Oak Ridge Today‘s John Huotari noted was due to too much gold mixed in with the solder. Gold is used for connectors because it does not oxidize quickly, and because of its high electrical conductivity; however, when mixed with solder that contains tin, the gold and tin can combine, making the combination brittle (PDF) under certain conditions. Cray is reportedly replacing the connectors to alleviate the problem.
I'd be quite happy if Google tried to oust X on the desktop. They could commit Apple-like resources if they chose to.
Canonical isn't good enough, and rich enough to do a good job---that's the problem. A bad job here is worse than spending their modest money working on something else.
That's the Nicene Credo of X, and is what's wrong with X.
It was an interesting academic project at MIT in 1982-1984, with the not-particularly-publishable issues of policy relegated as a grad student project.
Policy, and good policy is the really difficult and very important part.
"Now give me another self-driving car without any seats. No airbags, no overengineered crumple zones, no creature comforts. Just a cheap autonomous box on wheels for one-tenth the price. That's the 'car' that will pick up my drycleaning, my groceries.:"
That's the car which will be stolen in 10 days and reprogrammed to deliver narcotics, and you will find yourself on the end of a SWAT team and if they don't shoot you (your dogs are toast), you will find your home forfeited, and still owe the mortgage. You can't pay because you're paying your lawyers to keep you out of federal pen.
The biggest difference is that the truly big inventions aren't just software. They use software but are associated with sharp hardware developments.
The truly big things require exploiting new physics and chemistry. 6 person startups of the Proper Profile of Startups (24 to 31 year old Stanford CS graduates) don't do this well. New physics requires large labs, many years of work, and listening to old men with European accents. Return on capital is much lower for the owners of physical atom-based companies compared to bit-based companies, but the return to societal prosperity is substantially higher. Hence rational capitalism dispenses with investing in such atom-based companies.
Also the golden era of Silicon Valley was paid for by investment for military hardware, and not venture capitalists.
No, 15-20 kiloton weapon is about 15,000 times larger than a typical conventional weapon.
There are no 15 megaton weapons left today, typical strategic weapons are 300-600 kilotons, about 10 to 40 times larger than the 1945 weapons.
Iran will not have the capability to build multi-stage thermonuclear weapons without a significant series of live tests and quite a number of years, it is much more difficult than some pure fission weapons, which depending on how small you want to make them, aren't particularly difficult. (The ballistic missile is a more difficult technology).
Countries which have nuclear power for peaceful reasons and really mean it go out of the way to convince the IAEA that they really mean it and show so. There is nobody worried that Japan or Germany (!!) or South Africa or Brazil are building nuclear weapons. They also don't build ballistic missiles, and they don't have ballistic missile warhead tests end at an altitude which is only useful with a nuclear weapon. Also not having explicitly belligerent rhetoric about obliterating one's enemies (and having such enemies) also helps.
By contrast all of Iran's actions are most compatible with covert nuclear weapons development capability.
In this case, Iran has a uranium enrichment program that they are dead set on keeping to power hypothetical nuclear reactors that they promise to build sometime later, and haven't really even started. The one that the Russians built is being fueled with externally purchased fuel, and other nations have also been willing to sell lots of reactor grade fuel. Iran has refused to take this deal.
So Iran is spending lots of money, and incurring major economic distress to continue with enriching uranium. If it were truly for nuclear power reactors, an economic development issue, it makes no sense for them to pursue this path. Besides, they have lots of natural gas, and gas is not cheaply or easily transported (unlike petroleum), and it makes much more sense for them to use natural gas for electrical power generation and export as much petroleum as they can, just like every other Persian Gulf state.
There is also intelligence that they received information from A.Q. Khan's proliferation network.
Simple logic shows that the empirical evidence around Iranian government's policies and actions is most compatible with a nuclear weapons program and not a nuclear power only program.
There are many under/unemployed developers for the formerly industrialised central USA who can't easily move for family reasons, but you could pay them probably 35% less than in Stuttgart.
The difference is that the NYT, being lefty, doesn't impose an authoritarian ideological mindset down all the way, in contrast to say Rupert Murdoch's papers, because lefties don't like authoritarianism as much. The NYT's editorials and economic reporting are mildly left (by US standards).
No scientist knew if atoms were real or not, and they knew it, and they had no mechanistic explanation for the regularities in the recently understood periodic table, and they knew it. They had no mechanistic quantitative explanation for chemical reactions or reaction rates, and knew it.
Right now, physicists know that they have no good, experimentally confirmed, ideas for explaining
a) dark matter b) dark energy c) the variety of arbitrary parameters in the standard model
They have an large selection of theoretical proposals for the above.
Today they do have good knowledge about virtually all materials and energetic processes typically occurring and observable on Earth, That's a difference from the 19th century.
Slashdot Mirror
Pray they don't alter the deal any further.
No, Apple wins. Because there is competition between apps, and some app publishers will decide pay the 30% tax and make it easier for customers, and they might get more paying users that way.
It's like those immensely profitable companies bleating that their money is "trapped" overseas and they can't use it to "invest" in the USA. No it isn't trapped at all, just pay the taxes.
The luminiferous aether didn't have any observational or experimental evidence, and the theory was known to be problematic at the time.
"infringe" on what?
App was making it easy for people to order a sandwich from Brown's cafeteria. Somehow Brown thought that was offensive and something to be stopped.
App makers respond by making it easy for people to order a similar sandwich from a different restaurant not run by Brown University. University goes apoplectic, presumably offended that the app maker didn't go out of business immediately.
The university was angry about somebody who did something to drive business to their restaurant and moreover, did it for free. Sue them!
Will they sue the phone system and google for connecting them?
(x) it doesn't make the return from doing illegal activities negative
(x) it doesn't make the people who deserve to go to prison go to prison
"What the fuck were the congressmen thinking?"
Evidence for Red-baiting to smear Obama.
"What the fuck was NASA thinking when it complied?"
These idiots are in control of the future of our entire space program and get their panties all twisted because of something stupid and trivial, but if we anger them they may start cutting billions out of spite.
I'm not a chemist either but fortunately somebody who is working on it is.
Munger also reported the problems with the connector pins, which Oak Ridge Today‘s John Huotari noted was due to too much gold mixed in with the solder. Gold is used for connectors because it does not oxidize quickly, and because of its high electrical conductivity; however, when mixed with solder that contains tin, the gold and tin can combine, making the combination brittle (PDF) under certain conditions. Cray is reportedly replacing the connectors to alleviate the problem.
"And this is the reason X is still the superior GUI: it has heaps and heaps and heaps of Window managers to suit every taste."
Except good taste.
I'd be quite happy if Google tried to oust X on the desktop. They could commit Apple-like resources if they chose to.
Canonical isn't good enough, and rich enough to do a good job---that's the problem. A bad job here is worse than spending their modest money working on something else.
"Mechanism not policy".
That's the Nicene Credo of X, and is what's wrong with X.
It was an interesting academic project at MIT in 1982-1984, with the not-particularly-publishable issues of policy relegated as a grad student project.
Policy, and good policy is the really difficult and very important part.
NeXTStep was substantially better by 1988.
Even Michelangelo had a dead Jesus with a ripped body.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Michelangelo's_Pieta_5450_cropncleaned_edit.jpg
Michelangelo went for guys, too.
"Now give me another self-driving car without any seats. No airbags, no overengineered crumple zones, no creature comforts. Just a cheap autonomous box on wheels for one-tenth the price. That's the 'car' that will pick up my drycleaning, my groceries.:"
That's the car which will be stolen in 10 days and reprogrammed to deliver narcotics, and you will find yourself on the end of a SWAT team and if they don't shoot you (your dogs are toast), you will find your home forfeited, and still owe the mortgage. You can't pay because you're paying your lawyers to keep you out of federal pen.
The biggest difference is that the truly big inventions aren't just software. They use software but are associated with sharp hardware developments.
The truly big things require exploiting new physics and chemistry. 6 person startups of the Proper Profile of Startups (24 to 31 year old Stanford CS graduates) don't do this well. New physics requires large labs, many years of work, and listening to old men with European accents. Return on capital is much lower for the owners of physical atom-based companies compared to bit-based companies, but the return to societal prosperity is substantially higher. Hence rational capitalism dispenses with investing in such atom-based companies.
Also the golden era of Silicon Valley was paid for by investment for military hardware, and not venture capitalists.
No, the people think that the "strong leader" will abuse The Other, Wrong, Kind Of People, and Not Us Honest God-Fearing Folk That He Likes.
They are unwilling to believe that Romeytypes think every one of us is the Wrong Kind Of People.
If the business plan or product really sucked then they would have folded, not gone overseas.
Financiers have strong cultural prejudices against US manufacturing because of their political outlook.
Crick didn't need to sell it, as he could get paid fairly well.
He had the only reserved parking spot at the Salk Institute. His car had the greatest personalized plate in history: ACTG
Well through 2003-2004 he frequently attended grad students' and postdoc's seminars. Asked good but very tough questions.
No, 15-20 kiloton weapon is about 15,000 times larger than a typical conventional weapon.
There are no 15 megaton weapons left today, typical strategic weapons are 300-600 kilotons, about 10 to 40 times larger than the 1945 weapons.
Iran will not have the capability to build multi-stage thermonuclear weapons without a significant series of live tests and quite a number of years, it is much more difficult than some pure fission weapons, which depending on how small you want to make them, aren't particularly difficult. (The ballistic missile is a more difficult technology).
Countries which have nuclear power for peaceful reasons and really mean it go out of the way to convince the IAEA that they really mean it and show so. There is nobody worried that Japan or Germany (!!) or South Africa or Brazil are building nuclear weapons. They also don't build ballistic missiles, and they don't have ballistic missile warhead tests end at an altitude which is only useful with a nuclear weapon. Also not having explicitly belligerent rhetoric about obliterating one's enemies (and having such enemies) also helps.
By contrast all of Iran's actions are most compatible with covert nuclear weapons development capability.
They also want their own people to stop meddling in the oligarchical dictatorship's affairs, say by voting for the wrong person.
It just takes logic.
In this case, Iran has a uranium enrichment program that they are dead set on keeping to power hypothetical nuclear reactors that they promise to build sometime later, and haven't really even started. The one that the Russians built is being fueled with externally purchased fuel, and other nations have also been willing to sell lots of reactor grade fuel. Iran has refused to take this deal.
So Iran is spending lots of money, and incurring major economic distress to continue with enriching uranium. If it were truly for nuclear power reactors, an economic development issue, it makes no sense for them to pursue this path. Besides, they have lots of natural gas, and gas is not cheaply or easily transported (unlike petroleum), and it makes much more sense for them to use natural gas for electrical power generation and export as much petroleum as they can, just like every other Persian Gulf state.
There is also intelligence that they received information from A.Q. Khan's proliferation network.
Simple logic shows that the empirical evidence around Iranian government's policies and actions is most compatible with a nuclear weapons program and not a nuclear power only program.
There are many under/unemployed developers for the formerly industrialised central USA who can't easily move for family reasons, but you could pay them probably 35% less than in Stuttgart.
Many people in DC have a Blackberry because Blackberry got in first to government because of reasonably secure messaging & email.
The difference is that the NYT, being lefty, doesn't impose an authoritarian ideological mindset down all the way, in contrast to say Rupert Murdoch's papers, because lefties don't like authoritarianism as much. The NYT's editorials and economic reporting are mildly left (by US standards).
No it wasn't.
No scientist knew if atoms were real or not, and they knew it, and they had no mechanistic explanation for the regularities in the recently understood periodic table, and they knew it. They had no mechanistic quantitative explanation for chemical reactions or reaction rates, and knew it.
Right now, physicists know that they have no good, experimentally confirmed, ideas for explaining
a) dark matter
b) dark energy
c) the variety of arbitrary parameters in the standard model
They have an large selection of theoretical proposals for the above.
Today they do have good knowledge about virtually all materials and energetic processes typically occurring and observable on Earth,
That's a difference from the 19th century.