Very Insightful, Sir.

I have noticed an issue on slashdot is that most of the folks here do not seem to understand what defines wealth. Wealth is not money. Wealth is the goods and services that money buys.

Americans are wealthy because they enjoy more goods and services than most of the rest of the world. Europeans are wealthy because they too enjoy more goods and services than most of the rest of the world. It isnt about the quantity of dollars or euros.. its about the quantity of goods and services.

Printing up and giving out $1 million to everybody would destroy the economy because the first effect will be a lack of incentive for people to produce goods and services. So the very thing that defines how wealthy we are will immediately become short in supply, so the first effect to handing out that cool $1 million is to make us in general less wealthy.

False dichotomy.

It could also be that its impossible to see an order and then get in front of it, or it might be possible that the SEC looks for it so closely that nobody tried.

Bit I like how of the 4 options, you chose the two worst to false-dichotomize on.

Then you should support HFT's because since their introduction the spread betweens BIDs and ASK's has been lower than they ever were prior to the introduction of HFT's.

Quite simply the rise of HFT's signaled the beginning of the race to the bottom for market makers. At one time a seat on the exchange was expensive and there was a hard limit to the volume any member could handle, because it involved humans shouting "selling 5000 shared of MSFT at $19" and some other guy shouting "buy buy buy" and then that first human shouts "buying 5000 MSFT at $18.75" and some other guy shouting "sell sell sell."

In this simple example, the spread between BID and ASK was $0.25.

The profit you anti-HFT people complain about that the HFT people get used to be much larger when the market makers had humans on the floor screaming orders.. Now its literally $0.01 or $0.02 in most cases. That means you pay less when you buy, and get paid more when you sell. If you don't understand this then you don't know how trading actually works and are looking for a villain within the shadows of your own ignorance.

..which is why patents originally only covered manufacturing processes. It was perverted later.

Its worse than that. Another version of the video already exits, and the judge knows it.

So did you answer his question?

I will have to read between the lines because one group of people here dont seem to ever want to answer questions directly. So the translation is the answer to the question "Have I simply failed to notice or have they been silent on the issue?" is "No you didnt fail to notice. yes they have been silent on the issue"

So you are a conspiracy theorist.

This is why nobody listens to you. You took a perfectly valid sentence about the paper and went ahead and made your sentence invalid, and its because you wanted to load your sentence up to make the sentence stronger.

Its stronger, but now its also a fabrication. We observe that you fabricated, therefore we tune you right the fuck out.

How does this shit get modded up as informative?

...."reliable enough to act as registers"

This clown is a technology tourist at best.

Maybe they tried but the summary didnt give a fuck what costco said? Maybe this lack of intellectual honesty extends beyond slashdot summaries as well?

Maybe if you didnt live your life based on logical fallacies like plurium interrogationum you wouldn't be such a giant tool?

So the reason that brought you to the conclusion you did was proven to be incorrect, and your reaction to this event was to immediately theorize about another reason to get to the same conclusion?

Which came first, chief?

nah that was a totally different thing

..and the fact that its a legal requirement.

There are plenty of laws you can just go ahead and break and not expect severe repercussions, but when you go ahead and stick it to handicapped people well thats a story thats going to have its own legs, where even being "technically right" isnt going to shield you from the onslaught.

You know how desktops still contain that crappy internal speaker, and the computer beeps once when its starting normally? Thats because the ADA demands this audio feedback. Welcome Linux to the corporate world where you dont get to do whatever the fuck you want.

Handicap accessibility is a legal requirement in most of the world, and anyone that breaks that accessibility could be a target for a lawsuit. In this case thats the guy that submitted the "patch" that broke this feature. Sure, he wasn't trying to break the feature and he probably wont lose the lawsuit, but he will still be there in court defending himself and explaining why he didnt even try to fix it if someone really wanted to push this issue. Whats that? Linux is free software? Yeah, but maybe it came installed on his computer (you guys have been pushing for a more frequent Linux option when buying a desktop, right?) and thats exactly when the ADA kicks in.

Microsoft would also potentially be facing a lawsuit if they broke handicap accessibility and then ignored the issue. Keep that in mind.

The veracity of this claim is inversely proportional to the veracity of your previous claim.

Try having a self-consistent view of reality for a change.

No. Seriously. Turn in your geek card.

A geek would be interested even if they werent interested in graphics programming. Thats why Abrash was a writer for Dr Dobbs Programmers Technical Journal, not Graphics Weekly.

I have no interest in writing an operating system, yet Dr Dobbs also covered the porting of BSD to the 386 architecture culminating in 386BSD which I was an avid follower of.

You sir, are a technology brat, not a geek.