|
|
Or it could cause regional or tribal wars with people trying to get the best land for themselves.
The people that live there already know where the best soil is. Something to be said for living hundreds of generations the continent.
Its probably outsiders that need these maps, you know like agribusiness or something.
They already have more cellular subscribers in SSA than in the USA, so its pretty clear that they can afford
devices and computers. Google is very good at matching ads served to users needs.
Did it even occur to you that Google will be selling ads to businesses in the same region or same city? Or are you so naive you believe Google will push ads for BMWs and Vegas vacations for people who only search for sandals and and oxen?
Interest, yes. Cash, no.
That's what being very poor means.
Then how do explain that there are far more cell phone subscribers in SSA than in the USA?
Can't prejudice such as this get Apple's case thrown out?
Apparently not, much to my dismay.
Judge Koh said that it was clear that Samsung violated Apple Patents with the Samsung tablet, yet that was the ONE device that the biased jury found not to violate ANY patents.
She has previously issued a Ban on its importation along with her ill advised pronouncements.
(Don't think Samsung is so dumb they won't bring this up on Appeal).
I would probably say that the fixed costs for both ebooks and paper books is probably about the same, and both are probably under $1.
You are close to being right, except you hand waive away distribution and shipping, and stocking costs of dead tree books, which the publisher does not actually pay for. That component costs way more than electronic distribution.
But there is also fiction in the so called production costs of ebooks vs paper books. Yes they both require editing. But that editing is done exactly once. You don't edit again when an ebook is released.
And building an ebook takes LESS time than setting up a press run, (its literally do-able with off the shelf commercial (and free) software with one mouse click.
Author's royalties are the only real constant between books and ebooks. And the publishers force a lot of costs back onto the authors for printed books.
The rest of the cost comparison is bean counter's Bistro Math designed to come out a certain way before a single number is actually crunched.
technically you are right, but amazon was selling ebooks at a loss. without apple and the feds they had to take the losses for a few years until B&N bit the dust and then jack up their prices.
apple might have broken the law, but they got amazon to actually innovate in the book selling biz
Amazon wasn't selling e-books at a loss. Yes, they offered some bargains on some books, at some points in time.
But they have stated that they made money on the ebook segment as a whole, and that was NOT by including it in the e-reader segment.
Its is fiction that Amazon sold all ebooks at a loss. A fiction invented by Apple for the most part.
Probably because from Apple's perspective, all Apple did was let the publishers set their own book prices. That's basically what this case is about.
No, continue your reading and research. This is FAR from all the case is about. Apple entered into a collusion with the publishers (who have all ran for the exits) to fix the price of e-books across the entire industry, and to trash the first sale doctrine in the process by forcing every reseller to be the Agent of the publisher.
There is no way this could have been accomplished previously. Apple did this to raise margins because they wanted and demanded 30% on everything sold thru the iTunes store, but there was not 30% to be had with Amazon working on much slimmer margins. The only way this could be pulled off was for all publishers to simultaneously force all resellers to Agency terms. That required one big (new) reseller with nothing to lose, to agree to it, so that the publishers could preserve the e-book market, and force the smaller resellers to toe the line.
And while we like to blame Cook, it was really Jobs who formed this conspiracy.
But the way this lawsuit works the last to agree holds the largest bag. And Apple was too proud to admit its part in this collusion, and as a result they are going to pay up big. Very Big.
Early last year some Lenovo Thinkpads had issues with lockups due to a voltage regulator being off spec.
Not terribly on-topic, but it was either that or scream: "I just bought an Ivy Brigde laptop dammit, Dammit, DAAAMMMIT!!!"
But putting the voltage reg in the CPU seems to be fraught with peril as well.
This means you are going to have to 1) have redundant regulation on the mo-bo for other components, and 2) subject your CPU to much higher (and unregulated) voltages. You've added another heat generation source right there on the CPU, and power excursions are likely to take out your processor.
And your problem with this is WHAT?
The idea that Google is going to make money on subscription services is dubious.
By wireless I assume they mean Cellular.
Marketing Cellular to "sub-Saharan Africa" might work because The number of mobile phone users in sub-Saharan Africa rose by 44 per cent to 475 million, compared to just 12.3 million fixed line connections, representing the highest proportion of mobile versus fixed line connections in the world.
By comparison, there are only 326 million subscribers in the US.
(There is little street level wired infrastructure there, and cellular is the big player. (pdf). )
So cellular penetration is already bigger there than you might imagine, and apparently there is no problem affording handsets, and computers. So if there is enough money to buy equipment there is probably enough money to support advertising.
I would worry more about becoming targets for muslim extremists than failing to gain traction due to poor market conditions.
Fraud is against the law in all 50 states. It is definitely a matter for the police.
Even Andrea Rossi himself is a little afraid of this. He said that once you open the machine, the self-destruct function will terminate the working bits. He does this to protect his machine from prying eyes and people who want to steel this idea.
Then he just makes them, and sells them without a patent or not at all.
Because a patent is a two way street, you gain a RIGHT to exclusivity protected by society (laws), and in exchange society gets a new invention.
If his system self destructs, then he doesn't need a patent. He has all the protection he needs.
And Fairy's are people too, you insensitive clod!
So if you were being denied patents on scientific grounds you would give your "magical" discovery away to people who may or may not steal it and sell it.
You build a reasonable scale model, prove that it works, and you will get your patent.
A patent requires that you disclose how something works.
In exchange for this disclosure to society, you are given the right to make money from it for a certain period of time.
1982-ish and previous pennies were 97.5% copper. You can tell the difference by the sound they make when dropped on a hard surface.
Or by trying to pick them up with a magnet
Ah, no. Modern US pennies will not pick up with a magnet.
Modern pennies(post 1982) are 97.5% Zinc with the remaining 2.5% being electrolytically plated copper.
The only pennies you could pick up with a magnet were made during World War II, due to copper shortages. They were zink coated steel.
Exactly.
Disappearing to skip out on child support payments (as well as other debts and bills) is a big issue.
And probably those who defend the "right" to disappear and start over somewhere else 1) are male, 2) have personal involvement in such issues, and 3) think that saddling their Ex with huge bills "servers her right".
Intentionally disappearing is almost always a method to defraud someone else.
This fortune is dedicated to your mother, without whose invaluable assistance last night would never have been possible.