Comment Share prices (Score 1) 8
IMO buying and selling are a matter of gambling on which way you think other people gamble.
IMO buying and selling are a matter of gambling on which way you think other people gamble.
I know what
I'm sure that hopping on the AI bandwagon will fix everything.
The fact that it makes a big cloud around a galaxy or cluster rather than collapsing puts a lot of constraints on what it can do.
For more info, you'll have to go to someone who knows more about it than what I've read on science-news websites.
Dark energy is a real puzzle. As I understand it, it's too weak by a factor of 10^30 or 10^60 in comparison from what we should expect the known vacuum energy would cause. You see this mentioned very occasionally, but most treatments of DE that a layman runs across just ignore it in favor of wringing their hands over some issue that is trivial in comparison.
Some boffin cam up with that idea, but they rule it out because DM apparently doesn't interact with itself (very much) other than by gravity, so it can't clump up tight like a star or a planet or a living thing. (Something to do with shedding energy, IIRC.)
But it's a cool idea. If I were a novelist I'd run with it.
It's more a case of the fox being in charge of the chicken coop; or bank robbers gaining control of the bank.
The job of the press in a democracy is to hold officials up to scrutiny.
Interesting also how he fantasizes about needing get someone else to do it for him.
I think this is what he daydreams about when he wanks.
The logic is economic autarky -- the belief that we're always better off having complete political sovereignty over every part of our supply chains than having to depend on imports for anything.
This is likely also behind Trump's trade war with Canada. His demands with Canada aren't about discirimatory tariffs -- those were negotiated away with NAFTA then re-negotiated in his first term. His demands are now infringe on Canadian sovereignty, to give US control of Canada's external trade policy, and even on its internal markets (e.g., the use of French in Canadian internal commerce). Symbolically, that's why he wants to rename Lake Ontario to "Lake America". HIs establishment of US control over the Venezuelan oil industry is his greatest foreign policy achievement -- although it's not clear he understands the legal limits on what he can do with their money.
There's a foreign and military policy angle to this too: Taiwan is absolutely critical to the US economy, so we are absolutely committed to defend them if China invades. Semiconductor autarky would mean it's not our problem.
The problem with autarky is that even if it's a good idea (which economists don't believe), you can't conjure it into existence overnight. It will take many years, possibly decades for the US to replace the Taiwan's semiconductor industry. In effect, the administration is proposing to inflict the very damage on the US economy that a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would inflict.
And, once the US has voluntarily self-inflicted that damage, China would be free to invade Taiwan.
Ancient Rome made amazing aqueducts. One day they had built all the ones they really needed and with no new projects for a new generation to learn from, they quickly just forgot how to make aqueducts.
"Big Tech" is now entering this phase. In a generation all innovation will be gone.
900$ for a base model with 256GB SSD is pathetic.
Then make it retroactive. Donate the proceeds to the victims of this program who had to train their replacements.
Most of their revenue is from the cloud, but they still want Linux off the desktop.
MS couldn't give 2 shits about Linux on the Desktop. It's a tiny and irrelevant market share to them.
Not in 2003 it wasn't
Does anyone actually have any evidence PJ was a real person and not just a persona created by IBM's PR department? PJ appeared mysteriously, exclusively posting stuff supportive of IBM's position in this case. They never turned their attention to any other litigation. It's awfully suspicious. You'd think a real person who knew that much about the relevant law would have opinions on other cases as well, and you'd expect them to market themselves using the fame/goodwill generated with Groklaw. You'd also think they'd have done at least one interview, or you could find at least one person who's met them. I'm not saying anything posted on Groklaw wasn't true, just that it always seemed like a very successful IBM PR exercise to me.
Her name is Pamela Jones, she was a paralegal. She's done real interviews in the past. She was/is real!
Given that we live in a "market-driven" society, the correct conclusion is that companies are refusing to properly compensate skilled workers.
With executive pay at all time highs and the gap between executive and workers larger than ever, I would agree. This is a failure in the system where boards of directors are not holding executives accountable. The system can't hold for long.
An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.