A question remains: will companies like Apple, who have used proprietary chargers and connectors for years despite the prevalence of the USB standard, adopt the new cable?
I can't imagine they will, even with their recent EPEAT flip-flop. What I can't figure out is if they are just trying to keep their products distinct or they don't like it when someone else has a really good idea or what. They've already chosen Thunderbolt as their new adapter of choice, and while they'll never use that for the iFamily of products (since so many people won't/can't buy machines with that connectivity), I can't imagine they'll cave to the USB standard now. I do hope I'm wrong though.
Oh noes I used an e when I could have left it out.
I clearly meant not burbon. Which like everything in north america is made worse by the use of corn for cheap fermentables. They even put the garbage in beers.
In that case - cheers!. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
If they came out with a "1/2" SIM card that let me put the same SIM in 2 different devices and if one was powered on while the other was still on I'd get an error message I would be all over that. I know I could buy another account but that'd cost me another $50+ a month.
So people are choosing the worst of both worlds. It's not a phone and it's not a tablet.
Here in Norway you can have twin cards on the same subscription... if you call your numbers, both phones call. SMSes reach both devices - and both devices are attached to the same subscription.
Sometimes there is a fee (I'm paying $3 a month for it), but it is nowhere near the fees for a second subscription.
They should price the games according to the country being sold, like it's happening for years now with drugs. The can't complain for piracy when they sell a 70$ game to someone gaining 7$ a day. All these lost profits have the potential to lower the price for everyone.
I do have a problem with paying more, games are overpriced as they are but there's always some numpty that doesn't think when handing over money for the latest call of halo or whatever. To be frank, it's what is killing the games industry by rewarding publishers who release mediocre sequels with a large percentage of the budget dedicated to marketing.
What makes you think it is overpriced? Compared to many other forms of entertainment, the price per hour is fairly low. And in general, there doesn't seem to huge profits per game.
Of course, if isn't worth it to you - or you don't have the money - just don't buy it.
Allah is not the only god in whose name atrocities have been committed and the Koran is not the only poorly written, poorly translated, self-contradictory book purportedly containing the One True God's Word that has been used to justify atrocities. I would agree that religions are usually silly and find it laughable that someone might single out Islam as the silliest one. Christianity -- with so much lip service given to peace and forgiveness -- is every bit as silly. Anyone remember the Crusades?
I don't see any reasons why the crusades have gotten a bad rep, while the Islamist expansion that originally conquered these territories - and later Constantinople, the Balkans and even treatening Vienna - are different.
Islam was much more tolerant and forward looking for the first half of it's excistence after Muhammed invented it, but a combination of external events - Western trade routes by sea, Mongolian attacks, internal strife - and a more fundamentalist approach to religion ended this.
24.4% of eligible voters voted for W. 24.7% of eligible voters voted for Gore. 49% of eligible voters did not bother show up at the polls. Irrespective of your political leanings, it's more true to say that a quarter of you are idiots and half of you are dangerously apathetic.
24.4% + 24.7% *quickly does math in head*
That doesn't add up to a quarter.
Some voted for other candidates, and some voted blank?
I don't even know what Prussian Blue is.. but trying to associate Ron Paul with the extreme outliers in his group of supporters is an error in reasoning. Ron Paul has some screwed up groups that support him; Ron Paul does not support the screwed up groups.
Prussian Blue was a pop duo of brainwashed blond twins who were denying the holocaust, and at the same time as pitching racist and white supremacist views. They also described Adolf Hitler as a great man with good ideas... They've changed a bit now. Still, not someone you wanted to be related to when they were active. I don't know if Ron Paul was.
On a more serious note, they were almost actually wanting to get rid of a large number of developers by locking out Visual Studio from doing certain things, if I remember correct.
It was only developer backlash that got them to change their minds.
In Microsoft's defense (hell must have frozen over by now), this change (which they now backtracked from) was for the free version only. I don't see a big problem by releasing a free version of a software product to create interest in what Microsoft considers their future, Metro. And the paid for version was going to support "legacy" development in any case.
I'll stick with emacs and textmate on other platforms for other languages anyway.
Amazon was selling ebooks below cost? You do know that the marginal cost of creating an ebook is virtually zero, so it's frankly pretty difficult to sell them below cost.
That the marginal cost for the publisher is low (royalties) does not mean that Amazon's cost per sold copy is 0. Quite far from it. Marginal cost is also an impossible way to price digital products, as noone would buy the first copy.
It's the latter. You cannot sell your book cheaper anywhere than iBooks - it must be your cheapest price (or the same as everywhere else). Where I live, the government would call that a clear cut case of collusion, and they would get that contract clause smacked down so hard they'd be reeling for years. Not so coincidentally, Apple doesn't offer iBooks here.
Indeed. If it is the latter, Apple should get a big wrist slap. Requiring that the incoming price is their lowest is OK, but requirements on competitors gross margins aren't. If Amazon also has a MFN clause (likely) and decides that they'll just get 20% they should be allowed to pass this on to their customer.
Amazon wasn't as much dictating more reasonable prices (for your definition of "reasonable") as "selling at below cost" to build a dominant market position.
Besides, one vendor being able to dictate prices in the market is hardly seen as a healthy market.
That's a lot of words that don't change the fact that virtually every eBook you could ever want to buy costs more now than it did before Apple entered the market, which is the actual problem that the DOJ case intended to address.
Except that if you actually read the words, they claim the exact opposite. I have no data to offer about their claims, but you haven't offered any either. In fact, you seem to be offering what the DOJ offered, anecdotes involving the prices of a tiny number of books, with no analysis at all of the overall market.
And remember, Apple exerts almost zero (the exception being the so-called "most favored nation" clause) control over book prices.
The details of the MFN would be interesting... if it is "you can't sell it cheaper to anyone than to us", it can be defended. That's the publisher's problem if they want to agree to such clauses. However, if they let Apple set the resulting pricing - "noone can sell it cheaper than in the iBook store" - that would be problem; it should certainly be possible for other retailers to demand less than Apple's 30% cut.
Production has been purposely held back so that the country can be bankrupted paying for healthcare.
Unless there isn't going to be healthcare, a country will pay for it somehow... either individually or through taxes. A large chunk of GDP will go towards this no matter the way it is handled, and given the US' high cost and poor results the current way doesn't seem particularly successful.
As for F-22, it was built for other scenarios than what the US has been fighting the last decades. That might not last, and of course - defense costs are, in many cases, an insurance against what might happen.
Businesses don't pay taxes, their customers do. I cheer whenever I hear about someone dodging taxes, although I'd cheer more if the size of your accounting team didn't determine your tax bill.
Why don't people ask for laws simple enough to just -know-?
Only in perfect markets, where you don't have superprofits. In many markets, prices are (partially or fully) set to what the customer is willing to pay rather than the cost of providing the services. Google would be an example here... In this case, taxes would be from the businesses.
So I'm making an app, i can chose to develop for iOS.... or the BB10?
Seriously, why would i spent any time and resources on that platform, when I could just target iOS, and take advantage of the app store and the entire ecosystem that doesn't exist for the BB10?
Because everyone else is writing for iOS, and you'd have a lot less competition on the BB10 platform?
Deficit spending is clearly the right strategy some of the time. Particularly if you spend your deficit on infrastructure that grows the economy and results in increased wealth to pay back that debt. The real problem comes when you spend that debt on ephemera like elder health care that gets you nothing but additional expenses.
Actually, spending on elder health care and kindergartens/schools allows for a much larger part of the population to be working, and thus is a net gain. Also, I like to think that some of the reasoning behind it is the same as in why so much resources and personell is spent on badly wounded soldiers: Because the rest knows that the same would be done for them.
As to deficit spending, the problem isn't care of the elderly... that's a burden a society may or may not take. The underlying problem is that it is tempting to provide more services without raising taxes - or cut taxes without cutting expenses. As a result, many countries had a deficit in good times and already have a hefty debt when the current crisis came.
It is definitely partially a revenue problem... a big part of the US problem is unfunded "temporary" tax cuts made by George Bush. Given that they were "temporary", they didn't fund them.
Also, I believe in determining what the government should do first (not all it does today, at least in Norway) and then see how to fund it afterwards. And then go over the list again with an even more critical eye.. But things like education, defense, police, healthcare and public infrastructure need funding at a certain level, and then revenue must match over time - budget deficits in hard times are OK, but that means a budget surplus in good times. Not a permanent deficit.
I'm personally and vehemently opposed to property taxes, just on premise. Simply because the ability for your property (something you own) to be removed from you for lack of action is wrong IMHO..
Two arguments:
Many of the services offered by a county are related to the property: Fire, police, water/sewage/garbage etc
Tax is a necessary evil. While it has many good side effects, it also has some bad ones - apart from actually taking away resources from you. A high tax rate on income and spending makes the economy less efficient - if there is a high tax rate on labour, it means that people and companies are more reluctant to trade work/goods. This makes for an efficiency loss in the society - behaviour has been changed by tax. Tax on property, on the other hand, doesn't have these side effects. Also, it is much harder to hide.
Slashdot Mirror
A question remains: will companies like Apple, who have used proprietary chargers and connectors for years despite the prevalence of the USB standard, adopt the new cable?
I can't imagine they will, even with their recent EPEAT flip-flop. What I can't figure out is if they are just trying to keep their products distinct or they don't like it when someone else has a really good idea or what. They've already chosen Thunderbolt as their new adapter of choice, and while they'll never use that for the iFamily of products (since so many people won't/can't buy machines with that connectivity), I can't imagine they'll cave to the USB standard now. I do hope I'm wrong though.
Their current connector does a lot more than USB, so probably no.
How many of those people starve to death everyday? People who cannot provide for their kids need to make a conscious effort to stop having them.
It usually works the other way - when child mortality rate is high, you hedge your bets by getting more children so at least some grow up.
Oh noes I used an e when I could have left it out.
I clearly meant not burbon. Which like everything in north america is made worse by the use of corn for cheap fermentables. They even put the garbage in beers.
In that case - cheers!. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
How about sending real whiskey instead?
Bourbon always tastes so sweet, like candy booze or something.
"Real whiskey" sounds like genuine Panaphonic, Sorny og Aple.
If they came out with a "1/2" SIM card that let me put the same SIM in 2 different devices and if one was powered on while the other was still on I'd get an error message I would be all over that. I know I could buy another account but that'd cost me another $50+ a month.
So people are choosing the worst of both worlds. It's not a phone and it's not a tablet.
Here in Norway you can have twin cards on the same subscription... if you call your numbers, both phones call. SMSes reach both devices - and both devices are attached to the same subscription.
Sometimes there is a fee (I'm paying $3 a month for it), but it is nowhere near the fees for a second subscription.
They should price the games according to the country being sold, like it's happening for years now with drugs. The can't complain for piracy when they sell a 70$ game to someone gaining 7$ a day. All these lost profits have the potential to lower the price for everyone.
We need less geo-restrictions, not more.
I do have a problem with paying more, games are overpriced as they are but there's always some numpty that doesn't think when handing over money for the latest call of halo or whatever. To be frank, it's what is killing the games industry by rewarding publishers who release mediocre sequels with a large percentage of the budget dedicated to marketing.
What makes you think it is overpriced? Compared to many other forms of entertainment, the price per hour is fairly low. And in general, there doesn't seem to huge profits per game.
Of course, if isn't worth it to you - or you don't have the money - just don't buy it.
Allah is not the only god in whose name atrocities have been committed and the Koran is not the only poorly written, poorly translated, self-contradictory book purportedly containing the One True God's Word that has been used to justify atrocities. I would agree that religions are usually silly and find it laughable that someone might single out Islam as the silliest one. Christianity -- with so much lip service given to peace and forgiveness -- is every bit as silly. Anyone remember the Crusades?
I don't see any reasons why the crusades have gotten a bad rep, while the Islamist expansion that originally conquered these territories - and later Constantinople, the Balkans and even treatening Vienna - are different.
That being said, Christianity has a history of killing people it disagrees with - Hypathia, Jan Hus, Mary I, the thirty years war, witch burnings and the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre are just a few examples of this.
However, the reformation, the renaissance and renaissance humanism caused a loss of religious influence, a more tolerant society and progress in the West.
Islam was much more tolerant and forward looking for the first half of it's excistence after Muhammed invented it, but a combination of external events - Western trade routes by sea, Mongolian attacks, internal strife - and a more fundamentalist approach to religion ended this.
24.4% of eligible voters voted for W. 24.7% of eligible voters voted for Gore. 49% of eligible voters did not bother show up at the polls. Irrespective of your political leanings, it's more true to say that a quarter of you are idiots and half of you are dangerously apathetic.
24.4% + 24.7% *quickly does math in head* That doesn't add up to a quarter.
Some voted for other candidates, and some voted blank?
I don't even know what Prussian Blue is.. but trying to associate Ron Paul with the extreme outliers in his group of supporters is an error in reasoning. Ron Paul has some screwed up groups that support him; Ron Paul does not support the screwed up groups.
Prussian Blue was a pop duo of brainwashed blond twins who were denying the holocaust, and at the same time as pitching racist and white supremacist views. They also described Adolf Hitler as a great man with good ideas... They've changed a bit now. Still, not someone you wanted to be related to when they were active. I don't know if Ron Paul was.
China protects its companies (many of which are at least partially state owned). The US does not.
Sure it doesn't.
Remember that Google is a huge company with many many mouths to feed as well.
Yet, last time I checked, Android is available for free, and it's open sourced under the permissive Apache license to boot.
That's because Android isn't a product Google is selling. You are the product.
Android is just one more gateway for selling you to their real customers.
On a more serious note, they were almost actually wanting to get rid of a large number of developers by locking out Visual Studio from doing certain things, if I remember correct. It was only developer backlash that got them to change their minds.
In Microsoft's defense (hell must have frozen over by now), this change (which they now backtracked from) was for the free version only. I don't see a big problem by releasing a free version of a software product to create interest in what Microsoft considers their future, Metro. And the paid for version was going to support "legacy" development in any case.
I'll stick with emacs and textmate on other platforms for other languages anyway.
Amazon was selling ebooks below cost? You do know that the marginal cost of creating an ebook is virtually zero, so it's frankly pretty difficult to sell them below cost.
That the marginal cost for the publisher is low (royalties) does not mean that Amazon's cost per sold copy is 0. Quite far from it. Marginal cost is also an impossible way to price digital products, as noone would buy the first copy.
It's the latter. You cannot sell your book cheaper anywhere than iBooks - it must be your cheapest price (or the same as everywhere else). Where I live, the government would call that a clear cut case of collusion, and they would get that contract clause smacked down so hard they'd be reeling for years. Not so coincidentally, Apple doesn't offer iBooks here.
Indeed. If it is the latter, Apple should get a big wrist slap. Requiring that the incoming price is their lowest is OK, but requirements on competitors gross margins aren't. If Amazon also has a MFN clause (likely) and decides that they'll just get 20% they should be allowed to pass this on to their customer.
False. ebook market leads to more equal distribution across many, many books.
[citation needed].
Amazon wasn't as much dictating more reasonable prices (for your definition of "reasonable") as "selling at below cost" to build a dominant market position.
Besides, one vendor being able to dictate prices in the market is hardly seen as a healthy market.
That's a lot of words that don't change the fact that virtually every eBook you could ever want to buy costs more now than it did before Apple entered the market, which is the actual problem that the DOJ case intended to address.
Except that if you actually read the words, they claim the exact opposite. I have no data to offer about their claims, but you haven't offered any either. In fact, you seem to be offering what the DOJ offered, anecdotes involving the prices of a tiny number of books, with no analysis at all of the overall market.
And remember, Apple exerts almost zero (the exception being the so-called "most favored nation" clause) control over book prices.
The details of the MFN would be interesting... if it is "you can't sell it cheaper to anyone than to us", it can be defended. That's the publisher's problem if they want to agree to such clauses. However, if they let Apple set the resulting pricing - "noone can sell it cheaper than in the iBook store" - that would be problem; it should certainly be possible for other retailers to demand less than Apple's 30% cut.
Production has been purposely held back so that the country can be bankrupted paying for healthcare.
Unless there isn't going to be healthcare, a country will pay for it somehow... either individually or through taxes. A large chunk of GDP will go towards this no matter the way it is handled, and given the US' high cost and poor results the current way doesn't seem particularly successful.
As for F-22, it was built for other scenarios than what the US has been fighting the last decades. That might not last, and of course - defense costs are, in many cases, an insurance against what might happen.
Businesses don't pay taxes, their customers do. I cheer whenever I hear about someone dodging taxes, although I'd cheer more if the size of your accounting team didn't determine your tax bill.
Why don't people ask for laws simple enough to just -know-?
Only in perfect markets, where you don't have superprofits. In many markets, prices are (partially or fully) set to what the customer is willing to pay rather than the cost of providing the services. Google would be an example here... In this case, taxes would be from the businesses.
Just wait...PIVOT CHARTS! The thing we hate to use, must use, that G docs doesn't use. THAT should make life interesting LMFAO
Google Docs added the important thing, pivot tables, last year. The lack of this was a show stopper for many users earlier.
PivotChart is a trademark of Microsoft, and is just making a graph of a pivot table. That's easily done anyway.
So I'm making an app, i can chose to develop for iOS.... or the BB10?
Seriously, why would i spent any time and resources on that platform, when I could just target iOS, and take advantage of the app store and the entire ecosystem that doesn't exist for the BB10?
Because everyone else is writing for iOS, and you'd have a lot less competition on the BB10 platform?
Deficit spending is clearly the right strategy some of the time. Particularly if you spend your deficit on infrastructure that grows the economy and results in increased wealth to pay back that debt. The real problem comes when you spend that debt on ephemera like elder health care that gets you nothing but additional expenses.
Actually, spending on elder health care and kindergartens/schools allows for a much larger part of the population to be working, and thus is a net gain. Also, I like to think that some of the reasoning behind it is the same as in why so much resources and personell is spent on badly wounded soldiers: Because the rest knows that the same would be done for them.
As to deficit spending, the problem isn't care of the elderly... that's a burden a society may or may not take. The underlying problem is that it is tempting to provide more services without raising taxes - or cut taxes without cutting expenses. As a result, many countries had a deficit in good times and already have a hefty debt when the current crisis came.
hey cocksucker, the problem is the spending.
the revenue is. what. it. is.
it's the spending that is off the charts.
It is definitely partially a revenue problem... a big part of the US problem is unfunded "temporary" tax cuts made by George Bush. Given that they were "temporary", they didn't fund them.
Also, I believe in determining what the government should do first (not all it does today, at least in Norway) and then see how to fund it afterwards. And then go over the list again with an even more critical eye.. But things like education, defense, police, healthcare and public infrastructure need funding at a certain level, and then revenue must match over time - budget deficits in hard times are OK, but that means a budget surplus in good times. Not a permanent deficit.
I'm personally and vehemently opposed to property taxes, just on premise. Simply because the ability for your property (something you own) to be removed from you for lack of action is wrong IMHO. .
Two arguments: