I love the taste of fine wines...great with meals. I love a good, single malt scotch, with maybe a splash of water or a couple ice cubes (ok purists, bite me, I like it chilled a bit).
As a purist who drinks my scotch neat, I say it's more important to know how you enjoy the drink and to enjoy it as such rather than trying to conform to other people's method of enjoyment.
Unless you're mixing Diet Coke with 18 year single malt.
<quote>They figure given the asteroid's speed the cost of the speeding ticket could balance the budget.</quote> Brilliant!!!! Now the only problem is who to send the ticket to...
According to Fox, we are becoming a godless nation so... God?
The house? They're the only ones with blame here? Then how come congress refuses to pass (or even discuss) any of the budgets passed by the house?
It's BOTH side's fault, and it's not new. They've been doing it for years.
Correct me of I'm wrong but I recall budgets and other spending bills need to originate from the House. Nothing from the House means nothing for anyone else to do.
There's always room for another bug tracking app.
So sad yet so true.
The counterpoint to this argument is the following: Assume that you are a lawyer for a criminal who is at a trial for murder. Your client admitted it, people saw him do it, there's video of him doing it, audio, 300 witnesses, etc. In short, there's no doubt he did it. But you stand up and tell the jury that, despite all this evidence, they should not convict because there is some possibility that some unspecified evidence at some point in the future may come to light that will exonerate your client.
Correct. It's basically the John Conner defense (except not the savior in the future) and holds no merit in court.
Regardless of what your theological view is, we can't know all of the future effects of events today (some are obvious, many aren't) or know all the possible outcomes if things happened differently in days gone by. I posed a question that has no true, provable answer; only theoretical ones.
I know this is going to kill my mod points, but I'll throw it out anyway...
What if WWII wasn't the worst thing in the web of possible 20th century events? What if there was no WWII and the Cold War started pre or early-nuke with a (mostly) demilitarized Europe and America had minimal troops and arms factories setup (as is the case in almost every "somebody went back in time and killed Hitler" story)? What if the European powers continued pointless and frequent war, treating it as a sport as they did in the 19th century and before?
If you look at WWII as the almost-inevitable epilogue to WWI due to the terms put on Germany, WWI/WWII were sort of the "War to end all wars [in Europe]" (ignoring smaller, regional conflicts). No one has invaded London, Paris, Berlin (although it was divided), Brussels, or Rome in almost 70 years.
Imagine going back to the days when a tremor in the market causes a run on any the bank for cash because you might not be able to access it tomorrow to buy food and preventing all other banks from issuing loans in fear of a similar run.
Guess which one I prefer?
FIFY. I get the point you are making and I don't disagree. The annoyingly tricky part of this problem is that it's very hard to make changes that are net-positive and not zero-sum at best.
Too bad theres no such thing as FDIC insurance.
That fact alone makes me think you have no idea what youre talking about.
FDIC insures but it doesn't guarantee no interruption of service. Imagine losing access to your bank account for 7 days.
So if I pay the difference back to cancel my contract what is the reasoning behind paying $500K and going to jail for 5 years?
Same reasoning behind $250k per 99 cent song.
China isn't exactly unified. The cities are, but much of the country is still rural - small villages, far from central government, where the law is a distant force and the local officials can easily look the other way.
Add to this the well-known practice of bribing officials in China, the local government might already have been in the practice of looking the other way.
As bad as child labor is in the West, laws against it plus compulsory education ignore the real-life challenges such as starving while growing up or not having skilled jobs available in the area (which is a chicken / egg issue if there isn't skilled labor in the area to begin with). I do think Apple's efforts would minimize the practice and hope to see them continue seeking ethically-sourced (by Western standards) manufacturing.
Not to be too much of an ass, but shouldn't there be a nominal baseline percentage subtracted from that representing the understood cyclical unemployment of the system?
I don't see it as an ass thing. Take the GP's idea, factor in a base-line and there you go. Maybe add some industry-specific unemployment baselines (because why would we cut back on tech H1B visas if 90% of unemployment is due to construction or non-technical jobs?).
It's almost to the point where the terrorists don't need to actually pull off an attack. They just release "chatter" about an attack and watch the West scurry around.
It's pretty close to how the U.S. brought down our big enemy during the cold war, U.S.S.R. We made these big plans about Star Wars, and having satellites that would be able to shoot down any missile. Our side was mostly talk. On their side they spend enormous amounts of money trying to keep up with what they thought we were doing. Our president actually hired science fiction writers to come up with some of these fantastic ideas that sounded plausible and expensive. If the terrorists figure this out they can just up the chatter until we spend ourselves into bankruptcy and fall like Rome. Then the terrorists win.
The Russians did the same to us frequently. They would have airshows with the same planes flying over and over to hint they had more long range bombers than they did. They showed off a fake nuclear-powered long-range bomber to freak us out and waste time on our own (which we did, until Ike stepped in and said "you're wasting money on something that doesn't work").
LTE is nice, but given the pervasiveness of wifi and the fact that most people are dealing with data caps, it didn't drive sales.
It might not have been a big selling point for others, but it was for me. Even 3G seems to get a better signal than my 4 did. Also, the CPU is faster and makes using it much snappier (where my 4 would get sluggish at times).
That said, the nitpicks in the Galaxy commercials going after iPhone 5 buyers just came off as obnoxious. There are plenty of little design decisions to poke fun at on any phone (including the Galaxy).
"Don't drop acid, take it pass-fail!" -- Bryan Michael Wendt
