It's all about incentives. When we shut down welfare in the 90s, we did so in a way that encouraged states to migrate people enrolled in welfare over to SS. The states naturally responded to these incentives.
Chicken. It looks like chicken.
They do use dosbox, and I've even taken their assets and loaded them on an Android tablet... so at least some of their games have worked on Linux for some time now.
That said, there is a big difference between "probably works on" and "is supported and tested on".
Tell that to the framers, who feared a large standing army and thus wrote the 2nd amendment. We currently have the most impressive standing army that the world has ever known.
Obviously I was not quoting gross. Microsoft's is over 65%, and headed downward. In 2010 it was around 80%!
I wish you were right, but suspect you are wrong. The 2nd amendment was essentially abandoned after the Whiskey rebellion highlighted the ineffectiveness of the militias, and the British burning DC to the ground finished it off. They never bothered to repeal it.
Well, they've already become AAPL - their margins are almost identical at around 20%. But that is down from the roughly 30% margins they enjoyed over the last 5 years. And the trend is downward. A pessimist might look and see them trending towards Samsung's 12% margins if they insist on ramping up their hardware business.
I agree that it is hard, but we've had over a hundred years of public education to figure this out. I suspect some combination scoring from peers, parents, and administration along with maybe some test scores. We have to do something, and that is why I don't push too hard against the standardized testing - despite the obvious flaws, at least they are trying to affect change. It should be completely routine to lay off the bottom performing teachers in a district each year or so. Tiny districts are exceptions, of course - but most of your cities and suburban schools would stand to benefit.
I'd agree with you if we weren't actively lightening our fleet through uniform, nationwide CAFE standards, and if crash statistics didn't show a long-term, continuous reduction in automobile deaths.
Also, when comparing diesel and gasoline you need to account for the energy density advantage of diesel. This is around 12%, depending on the ethanol content of the gasoline. So now it is 37MPG vs 47MPG. Still impressive, but not as crazy and now it passes the sniff test.
They are taking on more and more hardware business. This is a much less profitable venture than they had before, so I don't expect things to be as rosy as you seem to. It is very hard to maintain the profit margins that they are accustomed to. Wall Street has given them a huge boost over the last year, but remember that comes after 10 years of no movement, and they still aren't anywhere near their highs during the dot-com bubble.
Still, the layoffs show that they are serious and PC sales have finally stabilized. While I am not a stockholder, I think you are right to be bullish in the short term.
Again, I completely agree. But I refuse to support throwing more money at the problem until they fix the systemic issues. If we are buying iPads while lacking pencils, this is just plain stupid and we need to address the stupidity. We already spend more per pupil than any other country in the world, and more in constant dollars than at any time in our history. More money will not fix anything.
I'm convinced that the teachers union is hell-bent on protecting bad teachers. Heck, they even oppose methods to try and measure teacher performance. Don't get me wrong - I'm not firmly on the side of the people who want to base teacher pay on standardized tests. But any interest which ignores the need to routinely purge the bottom of the barrel is clearly self interested at the expense of my kids. I therefore oppose simply throwing more money at the problem, since I feel it would be ineffective until the underlying structural problems are dealt with.
As an aside, I don't understand the approach that most unions take. Their position would be much stronger if they made their membership stronger. Culling the herd should not be such a cursed concept. Hard working union members should be incensed when slackers hitch on for the ride. Instead we see an institutional protection of the weakest members.
One somewhat recent example:
There are some people who feel that you have a right to speak on an issue only if they agree with what you are saying and will attempt to silence your speech if they do not.
That is why when you play online shooters, which attract many immature males, "faggot" is the default insult. They are insecure about their sexuality, as most young men are, and thus being called gay is one of the more hurtful things to them. they externalize that, of course, and thus that is what they use by default against others. However if they find something that works better, they'll go after that. Race, age, nationality, etc, etc.
They are assholes, sociopaths sometimes, they want to hurt others and they choose whatever they think is the most effective way to do it.
For that matter humans in general do it, women included. Bill Burr ha some hilarious bits, based in truth as the best comedy is, about women steering a losing argument towards personal attacks against their man. Saying he has a little dick, is a momma's boy, that kind of thing.
Well, that really happens. It isn't because women are some horrible creatures, but rather because they are using the insults they have learned will hurt the worst, when they get mad and decide to turn to insults. It's what people do when they lash out.
The difference between a normal person and a troll/asshole/ITG/sociopath and so on online is that most people do it only when they are angry, when they are lashing out at another person. These asshats do it for fun, just to get a rise out of people, and so on.
It is not something to be celebrated, or even tolerated (in any community I moderate trolling is a fast way to the banhammer) but trying to act like it is a problem limited to or directed at women is silly.