swehner

12 ms·

61.
by swehner 11y ago
I usually stay away from economist "writing." Here some laughing points from this article: * according to polling by Pew, a research outfit.... * Return on capital is at near-record levels, too (adjusted for goodwill). * Together
62.
by swehner 11y ago
Not sure it's about hating. I imagine they just personally got the wrong kind of encouragement and incentive.
63.
by swehner 11y ago
Who's reading freakonomics?? I don't think they (freakonomics) ever corrected their horrendous mistakes with respect to climate change. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-... http:&#
64.
by swehner 11y ago
Hey that's a good way to put it!
65.
by swehner 11y ago
Thing is, there is a sense of entitlement which is just not realistic with billions of peoples. (And down-voting doesn't change that ...)
66.
by swehner 11y ago
Sounds like total nonsense. More capacity ⇛ more traffic. Example reference, if one is even needed http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/11/californias-dot-admit... Not hearing that that is part of the thought
67.
by swehner 11y ago
The lock-in is where the catch is right.
68.
by swehner 11y ago
Imprisonment was not mentioned. And what "redress of the infraction" (for the "consumers") constitutes is not clear. Plus, the amount came from an "out-of-court settlement." In this case, why let Apple continue
69.
by swehner 11y ago
Yes, that is not a useful way of looking at the issue. Noone cares about the "null message".
70.
by swehner 11y ago
How do you distinguish this case from the obligation to sign tax returns? (I think that is 26 U.S. Code § 6061, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6061 ) The talk a bit about it here, https:/&#x
71.
by swehner 11y ago
Disagreeing. Nothing "very obvious" about it.
72.
by swehner 11y ago
Here is how one commonly goes about defining free speech, "Freedom of speech is the right to communicate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship." So that's a great freedom. What you
73.
by swehner 11y ago
Exactly, that's not a free speech issue, and talking like that is cynical.
74.
by swehner 11y ago
I submit this is cynical. To call this speech is just misleading. Laws will always be around to make people do things they don't want to do. To twist this into some kind of speech issue is silly.
75.
by swehner 11y ago
Wouldn't this apply to most dams around the world? Designed, constructed by foreigners?
76.
by swehner 11y ago
Everything a (smart) phone should be able to do, no?
77.
by swehner 11y ago
Why do you say "a judge has to agree with the argument" -- surely they don't need to agree with hokey arguments.
78.
by swehner 11y ago
The last point may well be the best, "TEACH CONCEPTS, NOT TRICKS"
79.
by swehner 11y ago
You'd think a stand-alone program could take care of this quite nicely? No need to clutter the compiler itself.
80.
by swehner 11y ago
Not sure what you're saying, what has to be?
81.
by swehner 11y ago
This argument sounds so hokey. Similar to the non-exectation-of-privacy-when-using-tor argument, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11166991 The US legal system appears as a special case
82.
by swehner 11y ago
Funny, they write "Aerogel is considered to be the most effective thermal conductor on the planet ..." where they mean insulator!
83.
by swehner 11y ago
Apparently this "trojan" only works on a Windows computer. https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/10/10/german-governmen...
84.
by swehner 11y ago
That page has some explanations including what they will be doing, "We seek to mitigate costs of shipping over time in part through achieving higher sales volumes, optimizing placement of fulfillment centers, negotiating better terms w
85.
by swehner 11y ago
Reminder: just say no to amazon!
86.
by swehner 11y ago
Even professional economists struggle to understand the exponential function.
87.
by swehner 11y ago
Predictable drivel. How about using international data?
88.
by swehner 11y ago
why was this downvoted?
89.
by swehner 11y ago
The "proving Einstein right" part would be more fitting if there was some independent evidence of the collision. As it is it seems to go in circles. But that's the NYT I guess.
90.
by swehner 11y ago
Short summary: verdict - useless

More ›