Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Very disappointing (Score 2, Funny) 284

by mrlpz (#30599188) Attached to: Google Nexus Rumored To Cost $530 Or $180 w/Plan
I can see the commercials with Luke Wilson now.... iPhone Luke is eating lunch while using his iPhone to tweet. "nexus" Luke tries to steal a french fry from iPhone Luke. And iPhone Luke bats his hand away saying, "Hey, why don't you buy some for yourself !". Then "nexus" Luke (sad-faced) says, "But I spent all my money on this....android....phone".

Comment: Re:Financing (Score 1) 284

by mrlpz (#30598954) Attached to: Google Nexus Rumored To Cost $530 Or $180 w/Plan
That would be true, if the service we adjusted downward when bringing an UN-subsidized phone to the party. Since we all know that to NOT be true, then there is NO win here. C'mon, use some common sense logic, that the purpose of subsidized phones is to ensure that there is a revenue stream that no only covers the initial cost of the phone ( and there's NO way you're going to tell me that any carrier pays anywhere NEAR the supposed retail price of a phone, and then can charge you an early termination fee of the sort that they charge....PUH-LEEZE. No one's THAT dumb to believe it. ) plus actual service costs, with some room for scaled profit throughout the lifetime of the person's contract with the carrier. So please stop squawking as though Google's doing someone some public service here. They aren't. PERIOD. Or as the commercial goes......The man said, "Ta-da !"

Comment: Re:Invest (Score 1) 501

by mrlpz (#29717519) Attached to: Why AT&T Should Dump the iPhone's Unlimited Data Plan

Build more towers. Increase capacity. Uncle Sam has doled out a lot of money over the last couple decades to build infrastructure. Build it. Cut dividend payouts a little bit, and build the infrastructure up. Maybe cut executive and management pay a little bit. DUHH. And, while you're at it, maybe you can get that "last mile" built so that all Americans can get online. Tiered pricing isn't the solution. Demand is going to increase every year from now on. Get used to the idea that you need to keep adding to and improving the infrastructure. You can't take a snapshot at some arbitrary point, and say "We need this much more infrastructure, then we'll be on easy street." Invest your earnings back into the system, where it belongs - in the business.

Brotha's and Sistah's can I get an Amen in the congregation ! But seriously, it only took 5 sentences what several building-full's of MBA's can't seem to understand. And as for the squeaky investors.....hello !...this is insuring the long-term sustainability of your investment, if you were looking for "Get rich quick", infrastructure large-player data communications isn't it ! Go look at some small company like HTC and invest in them so they get better phones on the market...or better yet, Huawei (?!?) who're now starting to come out with some real competition for HTC and others.

Comment: Re:toposhaba (Score 1) 792

by mrlpz (#29436067) Attached to: Congress Mulls Research Into a Vehicle Mileage Tax
I love statisticians ( always trying to convince people that 1 = 2 for most values of 1, that lot )... Dude...if bicycles are a visible component of the total mass of flowing traffic...guess what..you should have to abide by the same regulations other vehicles do, if not more so. Specifically because you're operating a vehicle that doesn't have the inherent "operator safeguards" that other vehicles do. YOU are your vehicle's safeguard. Coming from a city where 90%+ of humanity get around via their own vehicles for work, I would think if we had more folks riding their bikes to work we might encounter some of the same issues you've described.

Comment: Re:Didn't RTFA.... (Score 1) 288

by mrlpz (#26533565) Attached to: Building Linux Applications With JavaScript

Then you're unclear as to the reasons for having scope in the first place. It's why books are divided chapters, and chapters into pages, pages into paragraphs, and so on. It's to give it some semblance of context. Geez, why even have '{' or '}' then ? There's no reason to have key characters if there's no logical demarkation of scope after all. And if we're going that far, let's get rid of the ';'s then. We're all adults, we should KNOW where a statement ends, right ?

Obviously I'm being facetious, but only half so. It's because for as many nice things there are in JS, I keep coming up with more rationales for why JS must wither. Lua is a great example of scripting done right ( or at least more coherently than JS will ever be ), but it has it's limits of utility as well.

JS was a hack when it was incepted, continues to be a hack, and will plague us into the future unless people get a grip already.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the road to RIA is not paved in JS (even if embedded away from eyesight).

I request a weekend in Havana with Phil Silvers!

Working...