Can you explain to me... are there significant people who go "Off Grid" or are users with solar panels just offsetting part of the cost of their power?
I thought a small percent who have panels are producing more energy than they consume allowing them to "sell" it to the power company which means that they are due some amount of money... but still part of the Grid.
Between government meddling with regulations, oversight and taxation, and the whole "occupy" crowd making villains of those who have sacrificed for years to become successful, it's a wonder any entrepreneurs still exist.
Successful capitalists -- anybody who has more capital than they could spend in 100 lifetimes -- get an opportunity to allocate funds to things that benefit society. They earn the right to share the future. Too many pour billions of dollars into elections to buy regulations that have consensus not to benefit society. When so many successful capitalists are perceived to be focused on harming society like this, they are demonized.
Alas, the contributions of super-capitalists like Gates, Buffett, and Zuckerberg to try to benefit society get overlooked.
(except for publishers that constantly churn out shit games)
But most publishers occasionally churn out shit games. I think the game industry whole prefer that you spent more money on shit games OR spent money on trade magazines that tell you what games are shit or not. Your system, reasonable as it may be, ensures that money only gets spent on GOOD games which FORCES the industry to value high quality. I'm sure you know how much harder churning out a QUALITY games than shit games. It's A LOT harder.
The main focus of piracy on music... though... I think as long as the industry isn't suing people for thousands of dollars for downloading music than everybody is happy. I haven't heard of any recent high profile music lawsuit cases... so I assume this has basically stopped. Right?
This sort of financial activities is complete economic nonsense, as it brings nothing of value to people,
Indeed, economics is a zero-sum game. For every dollar somebody gains, somebody else loses a dollar.
companies or other concerns that actually produce something useful to society as a whole.
So companies are good, but buying and selling ownership rights of companies is very, very bad.
Just reading the
Not to mention the slice of the software industry whose bread-and-butter is "robot trading" software.
- by ways of a tax based on the speed of trading for instance -
"Sir, I pulled you over for doing 85 transactions per second in a 65 TPS zone."
and financial markets forced to become what they're supposed to be:
Financial tools for accumulating wealth?
places for investors to invest in real economic activities for the long haul.
So buying and selling ownership rights of companies is actually a good thing. I should get on that.
In all seriousness... lots of people and businesses struggle to "earn" more than they spend in a given month. The stock markets, however, offer people one option in case they have somehow managed to earn more than they need each month. The businesses who run the stock market are therefore entrusted in these people's wealth that is being accumulated for their retirement. People are free to use or ignore the stock market retirement companies. Some people may even be able to outperform these organizations in the long term because of lower overhead costs. Everybody else, however, trusts their retirement in these companies with deep pockets and access to "advantages" such as "trading robots" that maximize their retirement accounts. To this end... somebody else pays to balance those gains which is where TFS talks about being a "prey" instead of being a "predator". At the end of the day, though, if you think of the stock market as "Supplemental Social Security" (at least in US where SS is an implementation of a government-operated retirement organization) then maybe you'll be able to rest easier.
There should be a tax maybe
Why? No one has explained why anything needs to be done at all. It's all "rich people are making money therefore we need to screw it up for them".
Usage taxes are very common. Many jurisdictions have toll roads and parking meters for collecting funds when users elect to use those public resources. Congress controls interstate commerce within which these equity markets are classified and holds the rights to act when members of the public are misusing a market. I can't say whether I believe that trading algorithms are misusing the market, but it would be completely rational for Congress to institute a usage tax on equity market transactions if they felt misuse was occurring.
Fact is... though... that small usage taxes would be cost of doing business for successful trading algorithms and would cost regular users more money (theoretically lower profits, in both cases).... so Congress shouldn't rush into any decision to change the current system.
two people can verify their keys by phone (or whatever)
And why would you believe this to be secure?
Three people can keep a secret, if two of them are dead.
The general rule of thumb is that an investment must have a ROI of less that 7 years max, and ideally under 3 years.
For small companies, this guideline makes sense. For companies with a market cap of $280 Billion like Microsoft it would be foolish of them not to be spending billions of dollars trying to expand into new markets. Microsoft as a company is just about 30 years old and they have been a leader in the software industry for about 20 years. Companies like this absolutely must have strategic plans that go beyond the "7 years max" that you cited. Lord knows XBOX was a gutsy call back in 2001... but a dozen years later with the XBONE coming out Microsoft actually looks like they know what they're doing, strategically.
living wage
I keep this site bookmarked: http://livingwage.mit.edu/
he needs to face a free and fair trial
With a jury of his peers? I won't comment on whether the whistle-blower or the government is wrong here, but I would be very interested if a group of Average Joe's were given a chance to make a ruling with respect to the rights that a government has to keep details of its surveillance program secret.
It wasn't until the mention of Cyclomatic Complexity that I understood what the summary was saying. It boils down to writing individual functions logically with as many if/else/while/for/switch branches as you need. Oftentimes, breaking up code into multiple functions to satisfy some arbitrary Cyclomatic "Complexity" coding standard makes it MORE COMPLEX. On the other hand, Cyclomatic Complexity can be used to find spaghetti code that would make a good project for refactoring. At the end of the day... human analysis figures out what is simple vs. complex. It's impossible to know how complex a piece of software is with code metrics alone.
Might be doctor's intentionally botching Friday surgery to create the perception that Friday is a bad day to schedule surgery. It seems logical enough and would eventually lead to people not wanting to pick a Friday for their operation (and more doctor's getting Friday to do non-surgery activities -- like golf).
And FWIW -- no, I'm not suggesting this as a serious response -- just piling in with the groups of people who are skeptical about raw data without knowing any caveats or filters or "cherry picking" that was involved first.
I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.
