Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Rather than address the underlying problem (Score 1) 185

by Bob9113 (#47922443) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

How do you know what the growth rate in the 50s and 60s would have been had the tax rates in the US been lower?

I only deal in empirical evidence. The warnings about higher taxes killing GDP growth are demonstrably false by comparing observed results over the past 70 years.

What's that about being ignorant?

Imagining things that might have been does not count as presenting evidence.

Comment: Re:Rather than address the underlying problem (Score 1) 185

by Bob9113 (#47922393) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

It is stupid if you are paying credit card rates. The US government pays insanely low interest rates and a few times, they've been negative! If someone pays you to borrow money, you'd be stupid not to take it.

The problem is that those interest rates change; our debt is revolving. When the interest rates go up, we're going to have to have to pay down the debt while our interest nut is climbing. So either we'll be showing a higher risk of default or we'll devalue the dollar; either way, the interest will climb even more. This has been repeated dozens of times in history. Every time a country has tried it, with the possible exception of Japan right now, it has ended badly. And most economists think that in Japan is about to hit the wall -- they're going to be our canary in the coalmine.

Comment: Re:Rather than address the underlying problem (Score 1) 185

by Bob9113 (#47922349) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

Really? Doesn't seem that that far out of line.

Really? You're not very good at math. Average from 1950 - 1969: 17%. Average over the past five years: 15.22%. (17 - 15.22) / 15.22 = 11.69%. Twelve percent higher seems like a lot to me.

Now taxation per capita, adjusted for inflation, is way up.

So is income, which is why I, and the chart you linked to, and anyone who understands economics, uses percentage of GDP.

And spending is even growing faster...

By all means, cut spending. I'm all for it. Until we get there, though, we can't just not pay our bills.

Comment: Re:Parallax. (Score 1) 210

by msauve (#47920987) Attached to: Apple Edits iPhone 6's Protruding Camera Out of Official Photos
"Smaller things further away are easier to hide than close-up."

Not if the resulting images are adjusted so the pictured object is the same size. Unless you're reducing a detail to the single pixel range, that is. Additionally, the phone's lens would be more out of focus (when focused on the edge of the phone) when taken from a closer position - depth of field can be used to de-accentuate a feature. Finally, parallax would make the phone's camera appear smaller in proportion when photographed from a closer position.

You seem to be doing everything exactly, and perfectly, wrong. Are you trying to troll, or simply don't know what you're doing?

Comment: Re:Parallax. (Score 2) 210

by msauve (#47920709) Attached to: Apple Edits iPhone 6's Protruding Camera Out of Official Photos
Straightedge across phone's camera and edge. Another across the front of the phone. The two straightedges will form a wedge - a lens inside that wedge will see only the side of the phone (no camera, no front). It's not clear why you were playing around with taking pictures from across the room, I doubt the wedge extends nearly that far.

Comment: Re:Rather than address the underlying problem (Score 0) 185

by Bob9113 (#47920131) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

instead of trying to preserve the high tax state?

Historically low total tax as a percentage of GDP in a very long time. Lower than most of the first world. What high tax state are you talking about? 'Cuz it's clearly not the US.

And, we are running a gigantic deficit. We have to pay our bills, because paying the interest on credit cards is stupid, period. So, cut spending, then we can bring taxes back down to the current level.

And may I repeat: Historically low total tax as a percentage of GDP. Far lower than during the 50's and 60's, when we experienced the fastest sustained GDP growth rate of any first world country *ever*. So any Laffer Curve argument you want to make would just make you sound ignorant.

Comment: False Headline (Score 4, Insightful) 152

by Bob9113 (#47919563) Attached to: Tim Cook Says Apple Can't Read Users' Emails, That iCloud Wasn't Hacked

Tim Cook Says Apple Can't Read Users' Emails,

No he didn't.

Apple previously said that even it can't access iMessage and FaceTime communications, stating that such messages and calls are not held in an "identifiable form." [Cook] claimed if the government "laid a subpoena," then Apple "can't provide it." He said, bluntly: "We don't have a key... the door is closed." He reiterated previous comments, whereby Apple has said it is not in the business of collecting people's data. He said: "When we design a new service, we try not to collect data. We're not reading your email."

He said they cannot read iMessage and FaceTime, and they are not reading your email. That is a very important distinction. It might be one he was hoping you would miss, and you did miss it, but he did not say they can't access your email.

And I'm not blowing sunshine up his skirt. I came here intending to kick him in the balls (metaphorically, of course) for lying, but he didn't.

Pro-tip: If any system includes a password recovery mechanism that allows you to get back messages, then the administrator of the password recovery system can read your back messages.

Comment: So, he's a crappy programmer... (Score 2) 121

by msauve (#47919551) Attached to: Developing the First Law of Robotics
and couldn't program it to prioritize based on which one was seen first, was closest, was apt to fall first based on speed/distance, or any one of many other possibilities. You could even place weights on them, and throw a die at the end as a tiebreaker. The rule should be interpreted as "allow the least harm," not "allow no harm."

Comment: Re:You mean... (Score 3, Informative) 223

by msauve (#47917849) Attached to: AT&T Proposes Net Neutrality Compromise
"For IPv4, QoS simply means reordering packets"

Uh, no. Do some reading on diffserv. There are mechanisms to accommodate a range of bandwidth (assurance) and latency (expediency) needs. QoS is much more than simply reordering packets, and includes things like classification, marking, queue management (strict vs. RED/WRED vs. WFQ), policing, shaping, trust relationships, etc.

Comment: Re:You mean... (Score 1) 223

by msauve (#47917453) Attached to: AT&T Proposes Net Neutrality Compromise
"If you have a 12mbit connection vs a 20mbit connection how is it you think the traffic magically figures that out so it can send you traffic at the correct rate for your link?"

For most ISPs, that would be traffic policing, although some may use traffic shaping. Look it up, you'll learn something new.

You clearly don't understand the difference between QoS and congestion control, or between TCP and UDP, or that some protocols cannot degrade gracefully. Congestion control in no way replaces proper QoS.

When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the plane, the plane will fly. -- Donald Douglas

Working...