A few companies have gotten trouble for this over the years. IIRC Geico did this and lost a class action...so every employee was given x number of minutes to log on each day.

What's a problem is the class-action waviers that are getting built into pretty much every contract these days. Even if you spent *40 years* at a company ... 5 minutes * 5 days/week * 52 weeks/year / 60 min/hr * $10/hr * 40 years = $8,667 (minus taxes). Hardly worth getting a lawyer out of bed.

It would actually make more sense for the IRS to get involved. $216/year + 28,000 geico employees * 30% = $1.8M in taxes (yes I know it's not 30% to the IRS) Then figure in all the OTHER companies doing the same.

But on the other issue of power, just because it's a laser doesn't make it any more destructive than something else of the same power. A 100w lightbulb puts out 100x the power of a 1w laser pointer. And you don't see lightbulbs catching helicopters on fire. (even if focused in a spotlight) The only reason 1w lasers catch paper on fire is they're concentrating 1w of power into a 2mm x 2mm area. That would probably feel like a match at 1/2", enough to light paper. That's not going to melt metal obviously, at any range. The laser just lets you project that "half inch from a match" out several hundred yards. It doesn't make it more (or less) intense.

Not entirely true. A 100w lightbulb has an efficiency of around 2.5% for incandescent or 7-10 % for CFL while laser diodes are in the 25-50+% range. So 100w of electrical energy will give you ~an order of magnitude more light from a laser diode. You can definitely set something on fire with light from a 100w bulb (thermal conduction is easier though - ha!) There is, of course, the technical difficulty of focusing that on a distant target which is far simpler with the collimated light from a laser pointer.

No realistic number of hand-held laser pointers are going to melt, soften, or physically damage an aircraft at even a fairly short distance. Today. (though some POC will eventually take ~100,000 of them calibrated to aim at an exact point just to get their 15 seconds of fame) As power and efficiency grows though, this becomes a serious concern. Cameras on aircraft face similar problems to eyes though - they focus the light down on a small sensor which is easily overloaded too. Optics and filters can help, but the more light you filter out the harder it is to see.

Looking at the evolution from 1mW systems costing $100s-$1000s+ to becoming dollar store throw-aways...and 1W systems being reasonably priced and about the size of a maglite things will get interesting. You can already buy a laser that will permanently blind someone fairly easily. Sure, doing so is universally illegal (geneva conventions) but that's not exactly a concern during riots and rebellion. Once could conceivably build a weapon capable of blinding someone from more than a mile away - at the extreme edge of sniper range and beyond. Well beyond the immediate security cordon typically given to VIPs. As optics and consumer stabilizers/tracking systems (think DSLR and lenses) continue to advance things get even more interesting.

The light itself is plenty dangerous though. Even unfocused, it's temporarily blinding or extremely disorienting. I'm sure good old 'murica will start cracking down hardcore at some point.

Right? /sarcasm

I'm glad someone is pushing this topic (finally) and this is the perfect example. It's one thing to protect artists but the never-ending copyright extensions doing nothing of the sort. They ensure the media companies can generate recurring profits but, by and large, provide limit benefit to those actually responsible for the work. Oh wait...corporations are people now too.

Hopefully this is decided firmly, not on some silly technicality, and sets a precedent for other cases so common-use media can be pushed into public domain. Maybe someone will rule that copyright law is unfair, unconstitutional, or similar and FORCE our government to review this and move to a more rational policy.

I hope there was more to it than that...because if that's all it takes to win the intel science prize that contest is in pretty sad shape.

Super capacitors are more akin to high-discharge, very low capacity batteries with very little 'wear' factor.

How apple counts charge cycles is not entirely accurate. I don't know the exact metric but it's definitely NOT a simple count of how many times the batter was connected to a charger. This is based on personal experience and troubleshooting with an apple "genius"

Also, deep discharge, storing fully discharged, or repeated partial charge cycles has a significant impact on capacity decline for Li-ion. A good Li-ion should provide more cycles than that though.

Wh is total storage which is what you want to compare.

The 12v battery is a series of 6 2v cells anyhow. Lead-acid is inefficient in regards to energy/weight density. The benefit is the extremely high current it can provide and low cost (and simple recyclability).

If I was lugging 600Wh of energy camping I'd probably build something basec on Li-ion ... a dozen or so laptop batteries would weigh less than half that much and provide as much storage. Would need a more complicated charger though.

I'm from the same era ... you had to remember to charge your phone instead of it being automatic every night. Eeking out the extra day with the magical 1 bar left because you forgot to charge.

Phones today are so different it's hardly comperable. For one, always on push data...your phone isn't just pinging the tower every while anymore. Plus I used to pick up my phone to talk on it now and then. Occasionally send a txt (if a friend had the same carrier). Today many people check their phone every few minutes and play games. I'd bet a new iPhone used just as a cell phone would last at least several days or more. Not that anyone does of course...mine rarely lasts a day.

Actually I'd say the opposite. If I put down $500 once, I have that version. Patches and similar free updates don't sell me another copy or make the company any money. The only way to get more money out of me is to sell another major revision.

In a SaaS model (i.e. subscription method) I can jump ship in 6 months to another product with better products/features/updates and not lose my whole investment. Instead, if I'm paying the company monthly they have a very strong motivation to continue improvement. It basically removes the need for a major/minor release schedule. Just keep paying and you're guaranteed the latest, updated version regardless of what number it's assigned. If I walk away, I'm not out anything so the company is driven to keep me happy - in return they have a regular, predictable income stream that accountants and investors love to see.

Think World of Warcraft...though they do charge for major releases it's about the same cost as a 6 month sub (IIRC). Inbetween they constantly update, patch, monitor, etc. Granted they have FAR more overhead in running the servers the game 'exists' on which justifies their monthly sub.

I still don't like SaaS but I understand the business model. However, I prefer to own "my" things instead of giving some company arbritrary control of whatever they like. Some "fixes" are anything buy.

I'll go one better - fire and charge the teacher. S/he was ostensibly in charge of the class, provided the materials, and was 'supervising'.

With that said, I don't really support finger-pointing responsibility. Firing and charging the teacher is still far more than what should happen, but compared to expelling and arresting the student it's less extreme IMHO.

Everyone, everwhere seems to be playing an extreme version of CYA - and all it does is victimize people who do something silly, stupid, not allowed. That's HUGELY different than intentionally shooting/bombing people. Not expelling/arresting a kid for accidentally bringing a kitchen knife to school that s/he found and brought to a teacher doesn't mean others will take that as an invitation to bring their brother's M16 and start shooting.

You make some good points, but vastly under-estimate what property taxes can run depending on your area.

My $250k house costs 6-7 grand in property taxes. My mother's ~400K house is right around 10k owning to being in a much nicer neighborhood. 40K a year is high, but certainly not unbelievable.

Still, the overall income/tax breakdown that started this is very likely fiction (or the guy is getting enough tax advice to save himself a ton of money and should donate some to ./)

This times 10.

The problem is some of the big areas we *could* cut are the ones related to swing votes or political donations...which are essentially immune. So instead of ending corporate tax shelters and loopholes to get the $billions (and more) that SHOULD be paid, we're cutting air traffic controllers. Not administrative staff, not research staff, not 'tell passengers they can't use their ipad during takeoff but pilots can' staff, but the few people who actually serve a fucking purpose.

You don't know about. For one, federal income tax is, in theory, about that simple too. Reality differs greatly. Check yourself, I'm not getting paid to educate you.

Again, you just don't get it. First, define "sellers location" for us. That's the problem vexing tax collection NOW. As for the increase - internet sales that bypass sales tax suddenly get hit with it. In 2011 ecommerce was ~$255 billion. Let's say half of that went untaxed (probably much higher) and now we're taxing at ... 5%? That's $13 billion in additional taxes.

Straw man. Corporate tax shelters are an entirely different problem and discussion.

Which tax rate applies? See above.

Can purple eat from square rainbow? Sorry, my brain almost exploded because you can't seem to follow the discussion. I'm not suggesting a use tax, I'm explaining that we have (a broken) one now which you don't seem able to grasp. Buyers are supposed to remit the unpaid taxes but they typically don't. The proposed legislation will punish the SELLERS for what they buyers are doing.

Your original analogy/suggestion/proposal entirely ignores the definition of location in the modern world. Even take a simple ebay seller...their storefront exists on ebay servers in some datacenter. Their 'office' exists in their living room. Their warehouse exists in their garage...and in china because they drop-ship...and in another state because they sell for their cousin who's parents died. Do you really think the tax code for this will be SIMPLE and appropriate for small time sellers?

Yes, that's FAR simpler.

1-Let the US gov't collect tax from every state and then based on some magical "fair" formula re-distribute it. I'm *sure* that won't turn into a lobbying for fairness similar to all the current federal tax breaks/funding/etc. we have now.

2-so your idea is to just give the finger to large cities and crash their economy by forcing people out? Brilliant.

3-yes they do but forcing them to use only that is a huge shift to the tax environment. Better or worse is an argument that's not likely to end

4-once again, it shifts the tax burden to specific areas while other's pay less/nothing. While we're at it, how about anyone who smokes also makes a car payment for their neighbor?

If you think state tax i as simple as taking x% of a line from your 1040...please stop reading and leave the discussion. You're in so far over your head I can't even...

For the rest...

I'm not an expert, but I believe you're incorrect about how sales tax is supposed to work. Either way, it's obviously horribly complex and we can agree that buyers are basically ignoring/exploiting it. If you remove that, you add a major tax burden back on individuals. Basically raising the cost of goods by several percent in a substantial portion of sales. THAT won't do our economy any favors.

Beyond that, shifting the burden entirely to the seller based on their location? Impractical. I'll simply pick locale with the least (or no) sales tax or the best tax breaks (for larger companies who can negotiate such) and bypass tax once again. Consider how NY forced Amazon to charge sales tax on items sold to NY residents. The tax model is based on the buyer's location currently ... a use tax.

Sellers are taxed - they pay income tax. They *collect* tax on behalf of the state/city/etc.

You speak from inexperience. Something about walking a mile in my shoes...

While I understand this is /. and all ... consider the OTHER people who sell things - online, mail order, ebay, or other - and have no clue what SQL even is. Hell, plenty of people HERE wouldn't know a simple SQL query.

Entering every purchase into quickbooks to figure out sales tax and generate an invoice...BEFORE the buyer can complete the purchase? Or having to code a link between your shopping app and quickbooks? Or finding a ecommerce app that already has every tax jurisdiction accurately set up? ... not to mention who is responsible if they get one wrong somehow?

NO ONE is doing this today. No company has a physical presence in every tax jurisdiction and thus the requirement to tax every single order. Is it impossible? No. Is it easy? Nyet. Is it reasonable for small businesses? Can't say it is.