Oh and for a concrete example, here is that form, the simplified version with the last two lines combined, using the following values for X, Y, and Z:

X = 2, so we're exactly halfway between a flat tax and total communism.
Y = $25,000, which is a mean income of around $50,000 divided by X = 2 above.
Z = $17,500, which is a mean income of around $50,000 times a 35% tax rate.

That mean income and tax rate chosen because they're nice round numbers close to the current actual figures.

So, that said:

Line 1: Enter your gross income.
Line 2: Divide the amount on Line 1 by 2.
Line 3: Subtract $7500 from the amount on Line 2.

If you made $15,000/yr, which is about full time minimum wage ($7.25/hr * 40hr/wk * 52wk/yr = $15,080/yr), you would pay no taxes.

If you made minimum wage working half time (20hr/wk, 52wk/yr) for a total of $7540/yr, you would get a tax credit of $3730, which would mean a whopping $8 or so extra spending money a day. Don't spend it all on one meal.

If you made twice minimum wage full time for about $30,000/yr, you would owe $7500, which would be about $288 or 15% withheld from each biweekly paycheck.

If you made the mean income of $50,000/yr, you would owe $17500, which would be about $673 or 35% withheld from each biweekly paycheck.

If you made twice the mean income, or $100,000/yr, you would owe $42,500, which would be about $1635 or 42.5% withheld from each biweekly paycheck.

If you made a seven-figure income of $1,000,000/yr, you would owe $492,500, for a tax rate of 49.25%.

If you made an eight-figure income of $10,000,000/yr, you would owe $4,992,500, for a tax rate of 49.925%.

If you made a nine-figure income of $100,000,000/yr, you would owe $49,992,500, for a tax rate of 49.9925%.

But nobody would ever pay higher than a 50% tax rate, because we set our X = 2 which means the maximum possible tax rate is 1/2 = 0.5 = 50%.

Exactly.

This "there is no role for devops in a mature company" attitude cries back to the age of isolated business units with isolated departmental goals, often where sales sells products that don't exist and engineering produces products nobody wants. The money to run the company will come from somewhere!

In short, developers don't want to dogfood, because that's hard. It's much easier to not challenge yourself with divergent ideas from what you and your brainfund coworkers cook up: after all, developers made it, so it must be good.

And yes, devops is an integral part of dogfooding. It makes sure the left hand is talking to the right, Support is able to effectively move issues laterally, operations can effectively provision IT infrastructure budgets, and Engineering can focus on the real issues that impact the product. It's called teamwork. If you can't get this part done right - at the very least, making sure your product works in an operational capacity internally - how can you expect it to be a commercially viable option out of house?

No, C++ is a separate language from C, and far more expressive. It never was a preprocessor for C; Cfront was a genuine compiler that used C as the target machine, and fairly soon became inadequate for compiling C++.

If you think it's basically C with more libraries and a fancy pre-processor, you're using it wrong.

A cheap car (like a Toyota Corolla or Honda Fit) costs about $5000+/year to own. If you get rid of that car and live in a place where you don't need one (i.e. San Francisco) you've got about $400 extra per month that you can spend on rent. So you don't have to be rich to spend $1900/month, which is plenty if you want to share a 2 bedroom apartment with someone in SF.

http://consumerreports.org/cro...

It's not for everyone but obviously a lot of people like it enough to do just that.

Not me. I'm just as merciless with my own code as I am with others' when writing tests. Proper testing involves taking on the role of the malicious agent who is actively trying to break the code, feed it bad inputs and generally muck up the works. If the code passes those tests then it stands a much better chance of rolling with the punches in the real world of production.

Right, all those San Francisco Republicans... Did you eat paint chips as a kid?

Not only that, they also had access to all kinds of expertise that was developed using these precious federal dollars. Network communications, microprocessors, software architectures ...
How many of those talented engineers would've matured to that level if not for the cold war investments? You can certainly argue that government oversight of all this talent was misplaced, but you can't deny that it provided the essential opportunity for that talent to develop.

I can handle a static or rotating banner (which is what the suggestions thing always has been).

As long as they're not stopping content in the middle to hawk crap at me.

THE reason California's personal income taxes are so high is that nothing can be collected through property taxes. Property taxes in California are in a perverse way the same as rent control. The property tax pricing has gotten so far out of whack due to Prop 13 formulas that the only way the state can get any revenue is on personal income tax. Of course where people always own home, personal income tax is cyclical so a lot of the boom - bust cycle plays out in California's budgets because the state is levered up on the economy. Economy does well, everything is great. Economy does poorly, whole thing fall down.

And if they were using a FIPS certified version of OpenSSL, they would still be compromised. FIPS means....nothing in this context.

Just because no bank was on the list does NOT mean that they were not vulnerable, just that they have too much to lose by admitting it.

Exactly. Most developers are incapable of producing code that anyone would ever want to use.

In multiple companies for which I have worked, it was known who was capable of producing code that could actually be shipped and who could not. Management highly valued those who were capable of producing shippable problem free code.

Or about $900,000 less than OpenSSL receives in paid development work each year.

.
Operations people work in a timeframe of minutes to days

Developers work in a timeframe of weeks to months

Researchers work in a timeframe of years to decades

When you take a developer, who thinks in terms of months, and task that person to think in terms of minutes and hours, you are wasting a resource.

When you make someone respond to an overly wide range of timeframe-based events, the short term events always crowd out the longer term events.

Have you ever noticed that companies locate their research divisions away from the day-to-day operations divisions? It is to keep the timeframes separate.

Rent control is the CAUSE of housing shortages. Notice that all American cities with perpetual housing shortages have rent control, and heinous building regulations. What developer in their right mind would build something in this environment? You never hear about Chicago having citywide housing shortages. Why? Because there's no rent control. And rents are a hell of a lot cheaper than "market rent" in cities with a lot of rent controlled apartments.

That's part of the problem, yes. DevOps started off with reasonably laudable goals: to promote a methodology whereby development teams and operational teams were tightly integrated in a way that made operational and deployment issues part of the development process: development would be driven by the need to deploy useful functionality, not just create it. That way, you didn't have a discontinuity where things were programmed, then someone would have to figure out how to actually deliver that bunch of code.

The problem which the author of the article references is that this often gets perverted from the original laudable idea of teams of developers and operations people working together, to requiring every single DevOps person being equally qualified to do everything, and then from there pushed even further to many companies creating DevOps positions where those DevOps people are literally doing everything, and not just knowledgeable at those things.

There is no question that a programmer that understands SQL or database architecture or storage systems or high performance networking or internetworking or virtual hypervisors is a more valuable programmer. They can use that knowledge to guide their development, write better code, and communicate better with the actual DBAs and network engineers and sysops and hypervisor admins. But when management types start to think that the best way to do things is to hire DevOps qualified people to just randomly do everything without any focus or specialization, that's when the myth of DevOps overtakes the reality of DevOps and begins to create real problems.

I don't honestly know to what degree that is pervasive in the industry: I haven't seen too many examples of it myself outside of certain high profile ones (the author mentions Facebook). If it is trending upward, I think its a bad trend. But to the extent that I see companies use DevOps correctly, as the glue-people to interconnect individual development, operational/deployment, and quality assurance teams, I think its a positive. But I agree with the article author that actually *replacing* developers, QA people, and operational people with DevOps people universally would be a Bad Thing. I just don't know if its actually really happening

Um, how the hell did you get from what I said to what you said? I was, and am, advocating drugs that have a definite positive affect, without side effects that are too bad. That's basically what the FDA is looking for when they allow a drug onto the market.

I also fail to see the magical thinking. If the FDA requires evidence of safety and effectiveness before putting a drug on the market, then a drug on the market can be expected to be actually useful, without any consequences too dire (or the FDA will rescind its approval). What this has something to do with a guy named Knut who wanted to show he wasn't all-powerful escapes me.

Pharmaceutical companies concentrate on drugs they can legally sell, for some odd reason related to making money or something. If they're prevented from selling useless drugs, they'll try to make useful ones. They don't develop drugs at random, you know.

Huh, what? You're talking about the first bill Obama signed into law? The GOP is reliably management-vs-labor, to be sure (after all, organized labor is a key element of the Dem constituency, so at least the parties are representing their constituents by their sides there), but how did they kill it?

I did think you were trying to construe the "people can pay for their own birth control" as a women's rights issue, since that's recently in the news - OK, I guessed wrong. So what are you on about?

(BTW, I do wish there was a party I was aligned with, but I just want a small government party, and there's no such animal any more).

Every sentence in your post about Indian law and business environment is false. Most verifiable by 15 second Google search, some run deeper - might take 10 minutes.

A PR grab...that you can run on any modern unix based OS. Just not VMS or OS/2.

The difference is between developers knowing the operations side and being the operations side. Developers need to know the operations side to know how to write software that Ops can install and manage. And they should be involved in the development environment and installation in the testing environment so any gotchas can be addressed quickly and the developers know exactly what happened and can go back and make sure it doesn't happen again (especially in production). And of course when things really go pear-shaped during production deployments it never hurts to have the developers on tap to tell Ops whether there's a simple, quick workaround that'll salvage the deployment or whether it's time to roll back until they can fix the problem. But those are a far cry from developers doing Operations support and administration work on a daily basis. Frankly they're two radically different skill-sets. They're related, sure, but having a developer doing Ops as a regular job is like having Kelly Johnson keeping a fleet of Piper Cubs in shape. Sure he can do it, and technically he can probably do it better than a regular mechanic, but in a month or so he'd be bored to tears and walking out to go work somewhere where they'd actually let him do his job designing and building planes like the SR-71.

OpenBSD was using a variant of 1.0.1c with the bug.

Streetsblog is an anti-car greenie propaganda site. When they say they want to share the roads, what they really mean is they want the private automobile gone.

I have the following:
$600,000 house (and appropriate decor/landscaping)
Infinity G35
Corvette
Several Patents (yes, a real job)
A Wife
4 android phones
2 android tablets
3 linux workstations

I would sooner give up tech than use apple products.
I just don't 'get' the ambiguous sexuality of apple products.
(or whatever they are trying to sell besides hardware.)

I won't even go into the frivolous lawsuits.

I can afford them. I'm just not fancy enough. (and don't want to be)

Cheers

Which legal rights? The constitution of Ukraine only allows such a partition after a nation wide referendum. Russia signed an agreement where they guaranteed to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine. It is all a bunch of bullshit. They did not even bother making it a puppet state. They just steamrolled into it.

Do you honestly believe even if the voting was conducted properly that the people voting in that referendum did not feel coerced into it by the presence of Russian military forces during the voting procedure? Fact is Stalin agreed after WWII to let the people of the nations 'liberated' from Nazi Germany have free elections. He basically rigged all the elections to ensure the local Communist parties would win. This is a repeat of the same thing. Putin rigs elections in Russia and mocks the Russian constitution by doing a tag team alternation with Medvedev. Do you seriously think he would not do the same in Crimea?

It's more than just that. The United States post-war economic expansion was coming to an end. The rest of the world was starting to catch up, and the U.S was no longer the center of the universe. The steady decline of the American middle class is more because of this than anything else.