MattyMac
Sep 15, 06:38 PM
not too bad...wish it was alot sooner, but I guess I'll have to wait:(
Danksi
Sep 26, 11:18 AM
O2 has nothing to do with Orange. They're completely seperate companies with different parent companies. I believe Orange are owned by France telecom, where as O2 are owned by Telefonica.
Jay
Correct. My ex-colleagues are learning Spanish! :D
Jay
Correct. My ex-colleagues are learning Spanish! :D
aristotle
Nov 14, 12:00 AM
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
arn
Aug 31, 01:19 PM
Story updated.
It appears there will be an event on Sept 12th in San Francisco which will be broadcast to London.
arn
It appears there will be an event on Sept 12th in San Francisco which will be broadcast to London.
arn
Eidorian
Sep 9, 12:27 PM
Maybe they should have run all their benchmarks at the same time!It also depends if you can run multiple instances of that application. A little help here Multimedia? I know you've used multiple instances of Toast. Care to enlighten us on what other applications we can do the same? Maybe we should make a guide on it...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/web/2006-6-22.html
Kentsfield consists of two Conroe dies, each featuring two cores and 4MB of L2 cache.
I thought so. We've beaten Core 2 Duo chips to death and their design.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/web/2006-6-22.html
Kentsfield consists of two Conroe dies, each featuring two cores and 4MB of L2 cache.
I thought so. We've beaten Core 2 Duo chips to death and their design.
mcmlxix
Apr 20, 01:13 PM
everyone here is on facebook, exposing their real names, friends, user uploaded photos that are under the control of facebook under the new TOS agreement, where they live, phone numbers, what they like, what they dislike, their status updates, etc.
facebook.com? lol, more like facebook.gov
I've never used Facebook
-signed, Not Everyone
facebook.com? lol, more like facebook.gov
I've never used Facebook
-signed, Not Everyone
JGowan
Oct 27, 12:04 PM
I am so sick of these Greenpeace people -- pushy-shovey types with nothing better to do than harrass people when they're trying to have fun at an Expo. Don't they realize the people they want to convince are huge Apple supporters and enthusiasts -- they don't want to hear some downer telling them negativity about Apple.
Apple might not be at the top of what constitutes eco-friendly for GP, but they're doing ok. In my opinion, when a person buys a computer/ipod/whatever, it's THEIR responsibiity to do something with that's eco-friendly-- if they don't know what that is, then they need to be educated.
Most educated, computer types would be more than happy to do the right thing if they just knew what that was. In fact, the dumb ones would too.
Apple might not be at the top of what constitutes eco-friendly for GP, but they're doing ok. In my opinion, when a person buys a computer/ipod/whatever, it's THEIR responsibiity to do something with that's eco-friendly-- if they don't know what that is, then they need to be educated.
Most educated, computer types would be more than happy to do the right thing if they just knew what that was. In fact, the dumb ones would too.
DavidLeblond
Aug 28, 01:31 PM
my cat has told me that there will be a 23" chin-less iMac with the new Core 2 Duo chips, 1gig std, wireless kbd and mouse std. Or he is just hungry - hard to tell just what he is saying but he has friends in high places (trees mostly)
still heres hoping he's spot on
I'm hoping he is too!
My cat told ME that there will be Merom based iMacs released tomorrow. That, or she wants fresh water. I'm not sure which.
still heres hoping he's spot on
I'm hoping he is too!
My cat told ME that there will be Merom based iMacs released tomorrow. That, or she wants fresh water. I'm not sure which.
revfife
Sep 12, 02:35 PM
lol!
And so the cries of disappointment begin...
Thats the best part of these forums is watching the buildup until it reaches some ungodly device that is not probable or even possible and then sheer disappointment when Apple announces a decent upgrade to a great product. :rolleyes:
And so the cries of disappointment begin...
Thats the best part of these forums is watching the buildup until it reaches some ungodly device that is not probable or even possible and then sheer disappointment when Apple announces a decent upgrade to a great product. :rolleyes:
slidingjon
Oct 27, 12:24 PM
So all Greenpeace did was hand out leaflets in areas other than their stand? So they didn't smash up the Apple stand or invade Adobe chanting and shouting.
They handed out leaflets and were ejected because no one's ever allowed to talk about the downsides of our throwaway consumer-trinket technojunk culture without being told to shut up.
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Sad to see so many people now happy to have people's free speech stamped all over. No wonder Bush can dismantle the Bill of Rights and his lapdog Blair can swiftly remove centruries-old liberties with barely a whisper. I agree with Greenpeace's concerns. Vast toxic waste dumps with no proper processing are springing up across China.
If some fat overfed Westerner's kids had to live and play near a site like that they'd be up in arms! But, no, let's pretend the problems are somehow 'made up' by 'subversives' and need stamping out with the jackboots.
what kind of trade shows do you go to? :cool:
They handed out leaflets and were ejected because no one's ever allowed to talk about the downsides of our throwaway consumer-trinket technojunk culture without being told to shut up.
Heck, every trade show I ever go to has girls with their tits half hanging out wondering the halls handing out leaflets nowhere near their particular stand.
Sad to see so many people now happy to have people's free speech stamped all over. No wonder Bush can dismantle the Bill of Rights and his lapdog Blair can swiftly remove centruries-old liberties with barely a whisper. I agree with Greenpeace's concerns. Vast toxic waste dumps with no proper processing are springing up across China.
If some fat overfed Westerner's kids had to live and play near a site like that they'd be up in arms! But, no, let's pretend the problems are somehow 'made up' by 'subversives' and need stamping out with the jackboots.
what kind of trade shows do you go to? :cool:
dukebound85
Apr 25, 12:22 AM
You know what I hate more? effing speeders:rolleyes:
Scratch that....effing speeders who don't even have a years worth of driving under their belt and think it's safe to go 20 over
Man I wish the driving age was upped to at least 18
It's people like you who piss me off when I am riding my motorcycle as you guys are so effing unpredictable it is dangerous for everyone around you. Never mind my bike can easily outgun pretty much any car out there trying to go fast...
and you say you want to blow up cars obeying the law...unbelievable
/rant
Scratch that....effing speeders who don't even have a years worth of driving under their belt and think it's safe to go 20 over
Man I wish the driving age was upped to at least 18
It's people like you who piss me off when I am riding my motorcycle as you guys are so effing unpredictable it is dangerous for everyone around you. Never mind my bike can easily outgun pretty much any car out there trying to go fast...
and you say you want to blow up cars obeying the law...unbelievable
/rant
cube
Apr 22, 11:52 AM
then why did apple cripple the 13" macbook pro's with ****** resolution then?
Why did they cripple all MBPs having discrete graphics with Thunderbolt, instead of having a DisplayPort 1.2 port?
Why did they cripple all MBPs having discrete graphics with Thunderbolt, instead of having a DisplayPort 1.2 port?
cwt1nospam
Apr 3, 09:25 PM
Is it me or is McAffee screaming wolf?
Since and with no let up.
Since and with no let up.
BRLawyer
Apr 28, 03:34 PM
Cheers!
Microsoft is DEAD. And so is Google.
GO APPLE!
Microsoft is DEAD. And so is Google.
GO APPLE!
smazany
Jul 14, 11:52 AM
I just bought a Macbook, what does this news mean to me? How much more powerful is Conroe compared to my own Core Duo? Can anyone direct me to some benchmarks of Conroe that are being put against the Core Duo?
gloss
Sep 26, 06:59 AM
who the hell are cingular? what about orange t-mobile, vodaphone or o2? I guess it's US only again...
They're GSM, which means the likelihood you'll get the phone outside the States is very high.
They're GSM, which means the likelihood you'll get the phone outside the States is very high.
Gasu E.
Apr 19, 09:27 AM
So what? They're already getting sued by Apple, so what's another lawsuit? Point is, contract breach or not, Samsung could cripple Apple's whole ecosystem within days by halting all processor shipments. Apple makes the vast majority on iDevices and this would kill Apple's whole economic model. And this doesn't even account for Samsungs components that go into their Macs. As a result, Apple would have no hardware to sell. They would dip into their treasure chest. It could be devastating to Apple.
If Samsung breached the supply contract, they would be sued again. The difference is that in the infringement suit, Apple has a moderate case and the remedy if they win will be $100M-$2B range. In a contract infringment, Apple would have an ironclad case, and the remedy would be $100B-$300B-- in other words, Samsung would become a division of Apple.
If Samsung breached the supply contract, they would be sued again. The difference is that in the infringement suit, Apple has a moderate case and the remedy if they win will be $100M-$2B range. In a contract infringment, Apple would have an ironclad case, and the remedy would be $100B-$300B-- in other words, Samsung would become a division of Apple.
MacBram
Apr 29, 03:13 AM
Apple has done extremely well with mobile devices, but I don't know what Microsoft has to do with that. As far as I know, Windows still has about 90% of the market, and Apple still has a very small share. It looks to me like Apple isn't a huge player in the pc market, but they are the dominant one in the mobile market. Let's not forget that 50% of that $5.99 billion profit came from the iPhone and iPad.
Very true.
yes, 50% or so came from iPhone and iPad. So what's your point? These run on iOS which is a scaled-down version of the actual OS X operating system.
As far as "PC" marketshare: Apple has shown most of the growth in industry YoY for about 30 quarters in a row. Yes, it is easy to say that it is easy to double Market share when you are talking about a couple of percentage points. But we can still put it in perspective:
-- Apple has about 90% marketshare of computers at 1000 dollars and above.
-- Apples sells computers to consumers who vote with their dollars. PC 90% is due to large corporate buys and lock-ins and also counts anything that runs some version of Windows, possibly including cash registers and petrol pumps.
-- Apple is either about 3rd or about 5th largest PC maker by unit in the world, depending on how you count it: a lot of studies do not count iPads in the total because of some arbitrary metric or because they are paid by MS or another big company to exclude it.
-- consumers are, in fact, buying iPads in place of net books, which were oh so popular a couple of years ago, when it was said Apple could not compete and Apple should build an entry level netbook. Since then, PC makers have lost a lot of value trying to compete for the bottom, at the same time MS continues to generate serial numbers for exorbitant amounts.
-- Apple completely dominates mobile and portable -- MacBook Air and MacBook Pro at high end, and iPad at low end.
-- Apple's revenue this past quarter is about as much as Dell's whole Market cap! Maybe Mikey should just sell the company and give the money back to the shareholders (but who would want it). He did innovate BTO and online shop distribution chain back in the day. But he hasn't innovated products, production methods, materials, batteries, SoCs, supply chain, retail, customer support and satisfacton, etc.. Etc., in the way Apple so handily has.
Steve Jobs said years ago that he did concede the PC desktop "war", but the battlefield has moved on and new territories have opened up for exploration and colonizing. There isn't a single MS explorer or settler on the horizon. Unless you count their beloved interactive multi-camera tracking system -- and only then has it become worthwhile when they finally came up with the idea to put it in front of the TV for entertainment instead of sticking it in a bathtub. Meanwhile, Apple is working on SDKs that will allow every developer to create immersive 3D interfaces because face recognition technology with the one FaceTime camera will allow the device to calculate angle and distance of face from screen.
What it has to do with MS is that they have an aging dinosaur of an OS that is still DOS based and that they can't properly scale, and this becomes ever more evident by the day. They can only add lipstick to their old products and many of their customers still prefer Windows XP! They need to start again and reengineer an OS from scratch as Apple did when it bought Jobs' NEXT.
But can MS do it? Highly doubtful. DOS was bought in and they made the deal of the century with it. They put Windows UI over it, finally, because they had access to Apple source code for ten years. they absolutely wreck anything they get their hands on, ala Danger. Now the SalesGuy is running the company... fastest path to irrelevance.
MS' immediate existence is not in jeopardy -- they will continue to print their undeserved money for years to come. But their future relevance grows ever more questionable by the day. In short, Apple has plenty of headroom for Mac OS to grow into, while Windows at 90% can only go down.
Very true.
yes, 50% or so came from iPhone and iPad. So what's your point? These run on iOS which is a scaled-down version of the actual OS X operating system.
As far as "PC" marketshare: Apple has shown most of the growth in industry YoY for about 30 quarters in a row. Yes, it is easy to say that it is easy to double Market share when you are talking about a couple of percentage points. But we can still put it in perspective:
-- Apple has about 90% marketshare of computers at 1000 dollars and above.
-- Apples sells computers to consumers who vote with their dollars. PC 90% is due to large corporate buys and lock-ins and also counts anything that runs some version of Windows, possibly including cash registers and petrol pumps.
-- Apple is either about 3rd or about 5th largest PC maker by unit in the world, depending on how you count it: a lot of studies do not count iPads in the total because of some arbitrary metric or because they are paid by MS or another big company to exclude it.
-- consumers are, in fact, buying iPads in place of net books, which were oh so popular a couple of years ago, when it was said Apple could not compete and Apple should build an entry level netbook. Since then, PC makers have lost a lot of value trying to compete for the bottom, at the same time MS continues to generate serial numbers for exorbitant amounts.
-- Apple completely dominates mobile and portable -- MacBook Air and MacBook Pro at high end, and iPad at low end.
-- Apple's revenue this past quarter is about as much as Dell's whole Market cap! Maybe Mikey should just sell the company and give the money back to the shareholders (but who would want it). He did innovate BTO and online shop distribution chain back in the day. But he hasn't innovated products, production methods, materials, batteries, SoCs, supply chain, retail, customer support and satisfacton, etc.. Etc., in the way Apple so handily has.
Steve Jobs said years ago that he did concede the PC desktop "war", but the battlefield has moved on and new territories have opened up for exploration and colonizing. There isn't a single MS explorer or settler on the horizon. Unless you count their beloved interactive multi-camera tracking system -- and only then has it become worthwhile when they finally came up with the idea to put it in front of the TV for entertainment instead of sticking it in a bathtub. Meanwhile, Apple is working on SDKs that will allow every developer to create immersive 3D interfaces because face recognition technology with the one FaceTime camera will allow the device to calculate angle and distance of face from screen.
What it has to do with MS is that they have an aging dinosaur of an OS that is still DOS based and that they can't properly scale, and this becomes ever more evident by the day. They can only add lipstick to their old products and many of their customers still prefer Windows XP! They need to start again and reengineer an OS from scratch as Apple did when it bought Jobs' NEXT.
But can MS do it? Highly doubtful. DOS was bought in and they made the deal of the century with it. They put Windows UI over it, finally, because they had access to Apple source code for ten years. they absolutely wreck anything they get their hands on, ala Danger. Now the SalesGuy is running the company... fastest path to irrelevance.
MS' immediate existence is not in jeopardy -- they will continue to print their undeserved money for years to come. But their future relevance grows ever more questionable by the day. In short, Apple has plenty of headroom for Mac OS to grow into, while Windows at 90% can only go down.
bassfingers
Apr 17, 01:06 AM
why would I want to pay someone $17 an hour to a job a monkey is almost qualified to do? Sounds like an opportunity to hire less people, or jack my prices up. A job is worth simply what a job is worth. Period. If I'm trying to offer services at competitive prices, and someone is willing to bag groceries for $3 an hour, then they should be ALLOWED to. Rather than me just choose to hire nobody and using automated checkouts.
What happens then? More people find jobs, and prices go down. $3 dollars suddenly buys you a subway sandwich. # of consumers goes up bc more people are employed, which brings in more revenue, causes more hiring etc.
Also, people who do want to make $10 bucks an hour are forced to either be productive or learn something useful, which is good for everyone, plus that $10 is worth more now bc of deflation. Deflation would also drive interest rates on loans down bc the money you pay back is worth more.
Best case scenario, taxes are low at this point, and the government isn't a handout machine, so people feel the need to donate to an EFFICIENT charity. Rather than to the government, which is the most inefficient entity on the planet.
Overall result: More buying power, lower unemployment, more substantial and efficient charity, more innovation.
OR we can take away every incentive to be productive (France) and have a GDP smaller than the interest payments on the national debt (France in 2020)
I'd say since the high point of post WWII, we as a society in the U.S. have done our best to eradicate The New Deal and move back to reaching for magnificant wealth while screwing each other over.?
really? we've been getting LESS progressive since the new deal? I was under the impression that our government is GIGANTIC and tries to babysit us at every turn while simultaneously urinating on the constitution
No kidding right?
My buddy and I went boarding 2 days ago and he dislocated his finger (looked bad as it was all bent funny)
Anyways, took him to the clinic and was charged 1300 bucks to put it back into place and he doesnt have health insurance
Heaven forbid one needs surgery or broke a leg or anything more than dislocating a finger....would need a few million stashed away
Or perhaps a steady job mingled in with some tort reform, or a private charity willing to foot the bill if he were unemployed.
However, I don't know if boarding is the best option when you're unemployed
The more paranoid might suggest that oil companies are collaborating with auto makers and the government to keep efficiency as low as they can get away with. Remember, the record for fuel economy was set in the mid 70s in a slightly modified Opel: something like 237 miles on a gallon (US) of gasoline. Highly idealized conditions no doubt, but my goodness, the average automobile today should be at least a third of the way there.
US government regulations for increasing gas efficiency has resulted in car companies making vehicles lighter at rate beyond evolving the technology to maintain safety, which has resulted in an average of 10,000 avoidable deaths per year since the early 70's
But hey, maybe that fraction of environmental impact we have that's causing that fraction of a global degree change might have been marginally altered. Maybe. And it's only cost us ~300,000 lives so far. Thank you government! Just tack that onto the millions you killed by restricting DDT use, and you can further brag about your death toll
What is this supposed to show? That US corporations are more profitable? Is that a good thing? For whom?
Stock owners in these companies. Which are made up of middle class citizens
Ridiculous? Not quite, from the parent's perspective.
In Canada we have 12 months maternity leave, which can be taken by either spouse, or split, 6 months/6 months.
Yeah man, one of my biggest incentives to put my money on the line and open a small business is that I have the opportunity to pay someone to not work for a year.
Or maybe in that transaction I'll get to use the government as a middle man via taxes, and I'll end up spending %30 more in order to maintain its inefficiency
What happens then? More people find jobs, and prices go down. $3 dollars suddenly buys you a subway sandwich. # of consumers goes up bc more people are employed, which brings in more revenue, causes more hiring etc.
Also, people who do want to make $10 bucks an hour are forced to either be productive or learn something useful, which is good for everyone, plus that $10 is worth more now bc of deflation. Deflation would also drive interest rates on loans down bc the money you pay back is worth more.
Best case scenario, taxes are low at this point, and the government isn't a handout machine, so people feel the need to donate to an EFFICIENT charity. Rather than to the government, which is the most inefficient entity on the planet.
Overall result: More buying power, lower unemployment, more substantial and efficient charity, more innovation.
OR we can take away every incentive to be productive (France) and have a GDP smaller than the interest payments on the national debt (France in 2020)
I'd say since the high point of post WWII, we as a society in the U.S. have done our best to eradicate The New Deal and move back to reaching for magnificant wealth while screwing each other over.?
really? we've been getting LESS progressive since the new deal? I was under the impression that our government is GIGANTIC and tries to babysit us at every turn while simultaneously urinating on the constitution
No kidding right?
My buddy and I went boarding 2 days ago and he dislocated his finger (looked bad as it was all bent funny)
Anyways, took him to the clinic and was charged 1300 bucks to put it back into place and he doesnt have health insurance
Heaven forbid one needs surgery or broke a leg or anything more than dislocating a finger....would need a few million stashed away
Or perhaps a steady job mingled in with some tort reform, or a private charity willing to foot the bill if he were unemployed.
However, I don't know if boarding is the best option when you're unemployed
The more paranoid might suggest that oil companies are collaborating with auto makers and the government to keep efficiency as low as they can get away with. Remember, the record for fuel economy was set in the mid 70s in a slightly modified Opel: something like 237 miles on a gallon (US) of gasoline. Highly idealized conditions no doubt, but my goodness, the average automobile today should be at least a third of the way there.
US government regulations for increasing gas efficiency has resulted in car companies making vehicles lighter at rate beyond evolving the technology to maintain safety, which has resulted in an average of 10,000 avoidable deaths per year since the early 70's
But hey, maybe that fraction of environmental impact we have that's causing that fraction of a global degree change might have been marginally altered. Maybe. And it's only cost us ~300,000 lives so far. Thank you government! Just tack that onto the millions you killed by restricting DDT use, and you can further brag about your death toll
What is this supposed to show? That US corporations are more profitable? Is that a good thing? For whom?
Stock owners in these companies. Which are made up of middle class citizens
Ridiculous? Not quite, from the parent's perspective.
In Canada we have 12 months maternity leave, which can be taken by either spouse, or split, 6 months/6 months.
Yeah man, one of my biggest incentives to put my money on the line and open a small business is that I have the opportunity to pay someone to not work for a year.
Or maybe in that transaction I'll get to use the government as a middle man via taxes, and I'll end up spending %30 more in order to maintain its inefficiency
Vegasman
Mar 30, 01:13 PM
Go back five years. I tell you "Someone told me that I should use iMovie to edit the movies that I made with my video camera. Where can I buy it"? You say: "You should go to an app store". I say "What on earth is an app store?"
No, that wouldn't have happened. You would have said "You should go to a computer store". "You might try a games store, they might have it". You would never have said "You should go to an app store".
You would not have said "What on earth is an app store?". You would have said "Where is it?" because you would have known it is a place that sells apps/applications. Why? Because it is descriptive. And that is the point of the argument.
No, that wouldn't have happened. You would have said "You should go to a computer store". "You might try a games store, they might have it". You would never have said "You should go to an app store".
You would not have said "What on earth is an app store?". You would have said "Where is it?" because you would have known it is a place that sells apps/applications. Why? Because it is descriptive. And that is the point of the argument.
bad03xtreme
Apr 4, 12:12 PM
Good for the guard darwinism at it's best.
Object-X
Sep 10, 03:15 PM
A mid-tower between the Mini and Pro seems to be the only possible home for Conroe. And, even though I would love to buy one, I'm not sure if Apple really want to release such a machine.
You never know though, we could be in for a nice surprise sometime soon.
I for one need just this kind of setup. I use a mini, but it's integrated graphics is a bit pokey and cost difference between that and a Mac Pro leaves me with no choice but to endure the mini for a bit longer. The iMac is perfect, in terms of performance, but I don't want an all-in-one white computer at work. This is the downside to Apple taking a minimilist approach to their product offering. I think they could add a mid-tower without compicating things.
You never know though, we could be in for a nice surprise sometime soon.
I for one need just this kind of setup. I use a mini, but it's integrated graphics is a bit pokey and cost difference between that and a Mac Pro leaves me with no choice but to endure the mini for a bit longer. The iMac is perfect, in terms of performance, but I don't want an all-in-one white computer at work. This is the downside to Apple taking a minimilist approach to their product offering. I think they could add a mid-tower without compicating things.
anim8or
Aug 28, 01:15 PM
It makes more sense for Apple to wait for tomorrow, anyway. This way, they can avoid being drowned out by the other manufacturer's announcements and simultaneously steel their fanfare. They'll probably do something like "New, with Merom, and more..." and add on another fancy feature or two to each thing to outdo the other laptop guys.
Though, I still think they're coming on the 18th of sept.
Every time i read a post like this i cringe a little!
There are so many rumors about a new ipod coming in the next few weeks/months/etc, most likely announced at Paris (maybe).
Therefor if apple were to release a new ipod they would want to try and get rid of some older models! Thus i conclude that even if the new MBPs are announced or even shipping tomorrow then more people would buy one with the ipod offer... ...getting rid of sed older models!
So why would they wait til after the promotion?
Apple dont needhelp shifting notebooks but if they announce a new ipod you would bet that not many people would want the original ipod video over a new improved one!?
Though, I still think they're coming on the 18th of sept.
Every time i read a post like this i cringe a little!
There are so many rumors about a new ipod coming in the next few weeks/months/etc, most likely announced at Paris (maybe).
Therefor if apple were to release a new ipod they would want to try and get rid of some older models! Thus i conclude that even if the new MBPs are announced or even shipping tomorrow then more people would buy one with the ipod offer... ...getting rid of sed older models!
So why would they wait til after the promotion?
Apple dont needhelp shifting notebooks but if they announce a new ipod you would bet that not many people would want the original ipod video over a new improved one!?
vincenz
May 3, 11:28 AM
Gotta say, that 27" with dual ACDs is nice...
No comments:
Post a Comment