Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Could they get any more special treatment? (Score 5, Informative) 242

by snsh (#48052367) Attached to: Senators Threaten To Rescind NFL Antitrust Exemption

Don't confuse "nonprofit" with "charity". While virtually all charities are nonprofits, not all nonprofits are charities.

The NFL being nonprofit is simply a reflection of how the league is organized and equity and earnings are allocated. In this case, most of the equity in the NFL is held by individual teams and the teams' billionaire owners, and all the earnings are targeted to those same teams. The league acts as just a vehicle for the teams to coordinate functions like marketing, scheduling, and league matters. So when the league gets $10 billion in TV contracts, all the profit is distributed to the teams, which then pay taxes on it. Being structured as a nonprofit, the NFL league has trustees and beneficiaries. It could reincorporate as a for-profit, in which case it would have owners and shareholders. In that case, each team owner could be granted one share. If that were to happen, Paul Allen instead of receiving one tax bill for $100 million for the Seahawks, would get two tax bills for $70 million (for the Seahawks) and $30 million (for the NFL share). From the taxman's point of view, it's pretty much the same.

There's nothing sneaky about the NFL being a nonprofit. It's just reflects how the league was originally set up.

Comment: Re:I feel like we are living in an 'outbreak' movi (Score 1, Insightful) 258

A lot of people are directing outrage at the healthcare worker who dropped the ball, but what about the patient? He reportedly didn't tell the nurse/doctor "I just came here from Liberia a few days ago and was recently in contact with people who died of Ebola." which is what any sane person would have done. I'm guessing he did the opposite, and downplayed it like "Have you been to Africa? / Yes I used to live in Africa."

Comment: Re:Someone's going to complain (Score 1) 208

by snsh (#47998777) Attached to: Drones Reveal Widespread Tax Evasion In Argentina

Since the 1990's cities have had their own street-view like platforms. Both the data-collection and the UI were not nearly as refined as street-view is today. Cities would pay to have vans photograph the streets every couple of years. The vans had only 1 or 2 cameras, and the Windows software was crude and hard to use, but still saved a lot of time compared to dispatching an inspector to check for things like newly installed decks, carports, and sheds.

Comment: Re:The backup-camera rule (Score 1) 261

by snsh (#47769715) Attached to: DoT Proposes Mandating Vehicle-To-Vehicle Communications

"VERY FEW accidents involve a driver backing up and hitting cars/kids"

That should be "very few FATAL accidents involve a driver backing up and hitting cars/kids". I think the national total is around a dozen fatalities a year. On the other hand, scuffed and dented bumpers are probably a daily occurrence and many malls, parking garages, and city streets around the country. Heck, just look at the bumpers of your own car and count the dings.

Comment: The backup-camera rule (Score 1) 261

by snsh (#47768789) Attached to: DoT Proposes Mandating Vehicle-To-Vehicle Communications

Is this the same DOT that for years defied US legislation mandating backup-cameras becoming standard equipment in vehicles?

In 2008, Congress passed a law (signed by GW Bush) requiring the DOT/NHTSA to put together rules requiring backup-cameras in cars. The law set a deadline of 2011 for the DOT. And 2011 was just a deadline, so they could have implemented the rule in 2009 if they wanted. Instead they put off the setting the rule until just about six months ago in 2014. It won't be finalized until 2015 and won't take effect until 2018.

The reason DOT dragged their feet? The stated reason was that they needed more time to calculate the cost-benefit ratio of prevented deaths caused by cars backing up. Never mind that Congress already decided that matter, and that most of the measurable benefit is not going to come from personal injury, but from property damage averted when you don't dent your car backing out a parking spot because you can see how much space is behind you in the video-monitor. The unstated reason is that mandatory backup cameras would cost PROFIT for Detroit auto manufacturers.

And keep in mind these are lousy backup cameras which are mature, uncontroversial, and easy-to-implement tech. This V2V tech is still under development.

So what's the deal with this rush to mandate V2V? Is this Obama trying to establish legacy?

Comment: Trailer not HFR? (Score 1) 156

by snsh (#47562943) Attached to: The Hobbit: the Battle of Five Armies Trailer Released

It's too bad the trailer is not being released in 48fps HFR just in ordinary 1080p. My local theater is on the HFR list, and showed Journey in HFR but got so much negative feedback that they didn't do a single screening of Smaug in HFR. The next closest HFR-capable theater to me is 3 hours away.

Since the online trailer is just about the only chance most folks will have to see any of the films in HFR, it's a shame that it's not been made available.

Any given program, when running, is obsolete.

Working...