Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Most transparent ever? (Score 2) 34

by _Sharp'r_ (#47960093) Attached to: Mark Zuckerberg Throws Pal Joe Green Under the Tech Immigration Bus

"His [Schulte's] prior experience as Chief-of-Staff at Priorities USA, the Super PAC supporting President Obama's re-election," assured Zuckerberg in a letter to FWD.us contributors, "will ensure FWD.us continues its momentum for reform."

But, how is this possible? I thought Obama banned his team from becoming lobbyists after they left him???

I guess that rule doesn't apply to everyone. Good thing we have the most transparent administration ever and these lobbying efforts won't influence anyone...

Comment: Re:This is supposed to be the *WAY* they do their (Score 3, Interesting) 304

What's the difference between Bush's illegal wars and Obama's illegal wars?

In terms of the economy, Obama has done at least as much damage over time, based on his own administration's charts, even. Remember all those rosy predictions?

Comment: Re:Not sure (Score 1) 98

by danheskett (#47957269) Attached to: Is Alibaba Comparable To a US Company?

You bring up a great point about the rule of law. This is something that attracts investment, and it's something is close to undefinable. Not being governed in a logical way is business negative, but it's a gray line of when you go from a country ruled by law, and not.

The US has been sort of the gold-standard on this. Most large business disputes are handled in Federal court, which despite the reputation of the government, is well regarded as efficient in the international business world. It's the "rocket docket", meaning cases move. In some countries a business dispute could take 5+ years to get to trial, or resolution. In most Federal jurisdictions, with motions, filings, pre-trial conferences, it's between 12 and 24 months, with many on the lowside of that scale.

There is an untold economic benefit to this. Investors are unlikely to invest large capital outlayws without assurance that if something goes wrong they have an avenue of legitimate relief. Russia and China goes through spurts of foreign investment, but it comes and goes, largely because of this issue. When Putin starts jailing critical corporate executives and nationalizing large businesses it creates a tremendous amount of consternation within the investor class.

This IPO is interesting because it's a test case for how well China can provide a code of laws assurance to the worldwide investor. So far, so good. But the Chineese system has a similar habit of disenfranchising shareholders, and in this case, it could happen in the blink of an eye.

Comment: Re:Was it really so bad? (Score 1) 304

by hey! (#47956707) Attached to: Emails Cast Unflattering Light On Internal Politics of Healthcare.gov Rollout

Imagine if a state like Mississippi or Oklahoma had to get a system made? They'd hire a guy named Jom Bob from church to do it. They'd piss away the entire budget before they even found Jim Bob. They'd run it on index cards and toilet paper in type writers with no correction ink.

Well to be fair the deep-red state Kentucky had a very successful rollout of Obamacare (rebranded as "Kynect"), including it's own health insurance exchange AND medicaid expansion -- the whole Obamacare enchilada.

Under Obamacare, the federal insurance exchange was never intended to serve the entire country. In fact ideally nobody would have to use it, because states were supposed to set up their own exchanges that would better reflect the needs of their citizens than a federal one would. If you are forced to use the federal exhange, it's because politicians who run your state made that choice for you.

Of course some states have had their own exchange rollout disasters -- including blue states like Maryland and Oregon. If you're experienced with this kind of project you'd expect that. But others have had very successful rollouts, including a handful of red states like Kentucky.

Comment: Re:Aero Or Go Home (Score 1) 541

by ConceptJunkie (#47955847) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

Windows 8 is almost literally like going back to the 1980s. And the default wallpapers are all vomit-inducingly ugly. I agree that every UI designer at Microsoft should be fired and go spend their time making hideous public sculptures in major metropolitan cities that I don't live in like all their po-mo art school friends.

Comment: Re:Aero Or Go Home (Score 1) 541

by ConceptJunkie (#47955835) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

I'm amazed that Windows 8 is so advanced it's incapable of the "classic" Windows 2000 look that every other Microsoft OS in the last 15 years could do. And from a usability point of view, I could write a book on why Flat UI sucks. As far as I'm concerned the last version of Windows that wasn't eye-gougingly ugly by default was 2000. Actually, Windows 7 wasn't all that bad, but I still strongly prefer the "classic" look. But of course, Microsoft is so hypnotized by this whole "Flat UI" nonsense that they won't let me have it any more. Or they are so incompetent their state-of-the-art software can't display a 15-year-old UI scheme. Either way, stupidity or malice, it's really pathetic.

Comment: Re:The Year of Windows on the Desktop (Score 1) 541

by ConceptJunkie (#47955817) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

And the only pro feature I wanted (the Unix prompt)

What are talking about, Powershell? You can install that on any version of Windows. If you are talking about an honest-to-goodness Unix prompt then install cygwin or something that gives you bash or some other Unix-style shell.

Or is there something else I'm not aware of?

"Tell the truth and run." -- Yugoslav proverb

Working...