Speculating about the ability to pay back debt is inherently a judgement of how much debt a given party should carry. I thought that was self evident, but I guess not to everyone.
The agency does not believe the growth factors are realistic.
My point here being: why should anyone care what the agency believes or doesn't?
I am an investor of my own money and due to that latter fact I wouldn't trust these people to rate a sandwich. Three years ago they were handing out AAA ratings to instruments with backing that eventually required teams of forensic accountants weeks to unravel. Do you think the rating agencies had a thorough understanding of what they were rating? Do you think they now have a thorough understanding of the US government's financial future?
Reality is that investors listen to the agencies because they have no alternative. Most are playing with someone else's money and if recent history has taught anyone in that game anything it is that they will be all right no matter how things turn out.
Who are any of the rating agencies to say how much debt a given country should carry? Point to a single country that S&P or Moodys or whomever else has successfuly managed.
Not that the rating agencies do anything particularly well, but running an actual economy (versus participating in them) is as far removed from everything else they do as it can be, and still be called 'finance'. Had the US and other big economies not debt spent into the many trillions these agencies wouldn't have any securities left to rate in the first place. Show me another entity that can affect an economy like that.
It isn't basic math, or any math at all, really. Despite massive quantities of data analysis and some of the most mind bending graphs ever devised, plain old emotion still rules most financial markets and most certainly rules things like applying "AAA" versus "AA+" to some piece of paper.
These people everyone is amped up about changing the US' rating are the same people who entirely failed to foresee the biggest economic collapse most of us have ever lived through. They were handing out AAA ratings, to mortgage backed securities that no one other the guy who invented them could even understand, just a few months before they became almost completely worthless. The fact that anyone still trusts S&P and their ilk is illustrative of the fact that emotion rules this game. They've proven with math that they know no more than anyone else.
That reference comes from a paper written by George Miller covering a memorization study he conducted, that was mostly about memorizing random facts. The 'rule of 7' that was pulled from it has been misapplied to everything under the sun.
But it isn't really 'your' account. You merely signed up for a service created, implemented, and hosted by Google. You paid Google nothing for it and although I haven't read the Picasa TOS I suspect it contains some amount of favoritism toward Google, since Google wrote it.
All of this internet service type stuff is very new, but even non-technical people need to be reminded that any digital sandcastles they might build on someone else's beach are subject to being washed away at any time without notice and regardless of the difficulty it might cause. All a person need do is sit down and read one single TOS in its entirety to understand that.
Right. It is also a lofty goal to focus on hitting budget numbers for the next quarter, but that has to be balanced by long term strategy, or the long term goals will get shafted.
OP left out a fairly important 'more', suggesting Tetzchner and the board disagreed over the balance between the two rather than either of them wanting 100% of one or the other.
When I worked in industrial automation a damaged beyond repair power connection killed more than any other cause, and I went through a laptop every 3 months or so. IBM Thinkpads had maybe the second best connector from a durability standpoint but if something hit the cord it would sling the laptop across the room.
I've since used an MBP in similarly tough environments and have yet to kill it.
Do your Apple magsafe connectors attract a lot of metal shavings?
It read very Friedman-esque to me, in that here is some self absorbed pseudo geek who 'discovers' that hobbyists are still using Morse Code and that becomes an epiphany for him. And the mangled example of black mirrors being a 'primitive version of Photoshop'...that is an idiotic claim by itself but it doesn't actually support what the guy is claiming because it is a forward progression of technology.
Regardless, someone somewhere hangs on to about anything. Apart from the fact with enough mental gymnastics you can tie 'technology' to about anything humans have ever developed, the desire some people have to hang on to the past isn't limited to technology and media. There are still people riding horses. Still people making daguerreotypes. Knapping flint. Making fire with two sticks...etc etc.
Itâ(TM)s entirely HTML5-based and the aim is to reach some 100 million users in a key place: mobile. More specifically, the initial target is both surprising and awesome: mobile Safari.
I have a hard time taking seriously, the thoughts of a person who is surprised someone targeting the mobile market is targeting mobile Safari.
There is money to be made on both sides of just about any financial fluctuation.
And although I'm sure the staff here happily accepts paid stories, it would suprise me that they were sharp enough to manipulate the bitcoin market in this way. If you can't sell geek news, then you can't sell servers, then you can't sell generic software, then you can't sell Sourceforge, then you can't sell "The Online Network for the Global Geek Community"....what else are you going to do?
In a number of places, if someone breaks into your home and steals a firearm the first response of the police will be "why didn't you have more security?"
CPF has a large community of flashlight geeks. Some of them have been at it a long time and are very competent (see McGizmo), but there isn't really anything like what this guy proposes.
Building a suitable housing and mating a good switch and reflector and emitter and driver and lens and power source, have all been done many times over. There is a lack of good, readily programmable, software. Making the thing blink in different patterns is not exactly rocket science, but a few clicks to customize the way the driver manages light output in response to voltage gets my flashlight geek endorphins flowing.
Did the record companies read the fine print on this?
It would not suprise me one bit to find that once again record companies put themselves on the dumb side of the technological divide. Though it could change quickly, Apple has no serious threats to dethrone them as king of digital music. I don't know how well they've extended that to other media but I suspect they are players.
Someone in this thread called it 'an interesting attempt to monetize pirated music' if it works the way you think. I'd call it another nail in the coffin all the big labels are piled into. Without their back catalog, they are done.
Not that I'm the AC you believe me to be but my point was that the GGP's attempted point is perfectly accurate in that Android is in fact licensed to many many developers. All the developers who want it and comply with the license, in fact.
Just like WP7, except add 'pay Microsoft' to the terms of the license.
This is as opposed to your read of the GGP as attempting to claim that the fact Android is in fact licensed makes it closed. I'm unsure how you got that out of it, because the word closed never appeared.
I don't think the sort of people who would install resource hungry apps on their phone and then be puzzled enough by the lack of resources to take it back to the store, would benefit from any interface anyone could devise.
If anything, phone hardware should be sold more like computer hardware. With memory and processor and storage being prominent in the advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
Speculating about the ability to pay back debt is inherently a judgement of how much debt a given party should carry. I thought that was self evident, but I guess not to everyone.
The agency does not believe the growth factors are realistic.
My point here being: why should anyone care what the agency believes or doesn't?
I am an investor of my own money and due to that latter fact I wouldn't trust these people to rate a sandwich. Three years ago they were handing out AAA ratings to instruments with backing that eventually required teams of forensic accountants weeks to unravel. Do you think the rating agencies had a thorough understanding of what they were rating? Do you think they now have a thorough understanding of the US government's financial future?
Reality is that investors listen to the agencies because they have no alternative. Most are playing with someone else's money and if recent history has taught anyone in that game anything it is that they will be all right no matter how things turn out.
Who are any of the rating agencies to say how much debt a given country should carry? Point to a single country that S&P or Moodys or whomever else has successfuly managed.
Not that the rating agencies do anything particularly well, but running an actual economy (versus participating in them) is as far removed from everything else they do as it can be, and still be called 'finance'. Had the US and other big economies not debt spent into the many trillions these agencies wouldn't have any securities left to rate in the first place. Show me another entity that can affect an economy like that.
Continuing to listen to these idiots as if they have any clue what debt means to the US or anybody else is folly. It isn't like they've never been in over their heads before.
It isn't basic math, or any math at all, really. Despite massive quantities of data analysis and some of the most mind bending graphs ever devised, plain old emotion still rules most financial markets and most certainly rules things like applying "AAA" versus "AA+" to some piece of paper.
These people everyone is amped up about changing the US' rating are the same people who entirely failed to foresee the biggest economic collapse most of us have ever lived through. They were handing out AAA ratings, to mortgage backed securities that no one other the guy who invented them could even understand, just a few months before they became almost completely worthless. The fact that anyone still trusts S&P and their ilk is illustrative of the fact that emotion rules this game. They've proven with math that they know no more than anyone else.
No.
That reference comes from a paper written by George Miller covering a memorization study he conducted, that was mostly about memorizing random facts. The 'rule of 7' that was pulled from it has been misapplied to everything under the sun.
In Miller's words:
http://members.shaw.ca/philip.sharman/myth.html
While the chart isn't a very good chart, I also can't figure out how anyone could write
based on numbers, it seems SSDs aren't more reliable than hard drives
about it. Even if the projections are thrown out there are wild differences between all the SSD plots and all the HDD plots.
But it isn't really 'your' account. You merely signed up for a service created, implemented, and hosted by Google. You paid Google nothing for it and although I haven't read the Picasa TOS I suspect it contains some amount of favoritism toward Google, since Google wrote it.
All of this internet service type stuff is very new, but even non-technical people need to be reminded that any digital sandcastles they might build on someone else's beach are subject to being washed away at any time without notice and regardless of the difficulty it might cause. All a person need do is sit down and read one single TOS in its entirety to understand that.
Right. It is also a lofty goal to focus on hitting budget numbers for the next quarter, but that has to be balanced by long term strategy, or the long term goals will get shafted.
OP left out a fairly important 'more', suggesting Tetzchner and the board disagreed over the balance between the two rather than either of them wanting 100% of one or the other.
You must not do much with your laptops.
When I worked in industrial automation a damaged beyond repair power connection killed more than any other cause, and I went through a laptop every 3 months or so. IBM Thinkpads had maybe the second best connector from a durability standpoint but if something hit the cord it would sling the laptop across the room.
I've since used an MBP in similarly tough environments and have yet to kill it.
Do your Apple magsafe connectors attract a lot of metal shavings?
I have a Zenith CH750 with an O200D, that is a bit heavier with a bit less HP, and I don't feel it is particularly lacking.
But then it has wings...
It read very Friedman-esque to me, in that here is some self absorbed pseudo geek who 'discovers' that hobbyists are still using Morse Code and that becomes an epiphany for him. And the mangled example of black mirrors being a 'primitive version of Photoshop'...that is an idiotic claim by itself but it doesn't actually support what the guy is claiming because it is a forward progression of technology.
Regardless, someone somewhere hangs on to about anything. Apart from the fact with enough mental gymnastics you can tie 'technology' to about anything humans have ever developed, the desire some people have to hang on to the past isn't limited to technology and media. There are still people riding horses. Still people making daguerreotypes. Knapping flint. Making fire with two sticks...etc etc.
FTA:
Itâ(TM)s entirely HTML5-based and the aim is to reach some 100 million users in a key place: mobile. More specifically, the initial target is both surprising and awesome: mobile Safari.
I have a hard time taking seriously, the thoughts of a person who is surprised someone targeting the mobile market is targeting mobile Safari.
There is money to be made on both sides of just about any financial fluctuation.
And although I'm sure the staff here happily accepts paid stories, it would suprise me that they were sharp enough to manipulate the bitcoin market in this way. If you can't sell geek news, then you can't sell servers, then you can't sell generic software, then you can't sell Sourceforge, then you can't sell "The Online Network for the Global Geek Community"....what else are you going to do?
In a number of places, if someone breaks into your home and steals a firearm the first response of the police will be "why didn't you have more security?"
You are going to the wrong places for music if you think its soul has nearly vanished.
You know what they say about capitalists and rope...
A government stretched the definition of something to fit their will, rather than bent their will to the definition?
I'm shocked.
If he is advocating tax funds be distributed to authors, he is certainly advocating the forcing of something.
So why haven't you done it?
CPF has a large community of flashlight geeks. Some of them have been at it a long time and are very competent (see McGizmo), but there isn't really anything like what this guy proposes.
Building a suitable housing and mating a good switch and reflector and emitter and driver and lens and power source, have all been done many times over. There is a lack of good, readily programmable, software. Making the thing blink in different patterns is not exactly rocket science, but a few clicks to customize the way the driver manages light output in response to voltage gets my flashlight geek endorphins flowing.
Yes, because they can't sustain the voltages needed to drive the emitter. At least not for any appreciable time.
Which was a 'clone' of OSX, which was a 'clone' of Mach, which was a 'clone' of BSD, which was a 'clone' of Unix, and so on and so forth.
Cyber hanky to you, for the trouble.
Did the record companies read the fine print on this?
It would not suprise me one bit to find that once again record companies put themselves on the dumb side of the technological divide. Though it could change quickly, Apple has no serious threats to dethrone them as king of digital music. I don't know how well they've extended that to other media but I suspect they are players.
Someone in this thread called it 'an interesting attempt to monetize pirated music' if it works the way you think. I'd call it another nail in the coffin all the big labels are piled into. Without their back catalog, they are done.
Not that I'm the AC you believe me to be but my point was that the GGP's attempted point is perfectly accurate in that Android is in fact licensed to many many developers. All the developers who want it and comply with the license, in fact.
Just like WP7, except add 'pay Microsoft' to the terms of the license.
This is as opposed to your read of the GGP as attempting to claim that the fact Android is in fact licensed makes it closed. I'm unsure how you got that out of it, because the word closed never appeared.
That is pretty freaking amazing!
I don't think the sort of people who would install resource hungry apps on their phone and then be puzzled enough by the lack of resources to take it back to the store, would benefit from any interface anyone could devise. If anything, phone hardware should be sold more like computer hardware. With memory and processor and storage being prominent in the advertising.