whyrichard
Jan 20, 02:33 PM
http://nytimes.com/2004/01/19/business/19neco.html
fivepoint
Mar 2, 01:48 PM
Sorry, you're just compounding fallacy upon fallacy. This is plainly incorrect. Your first post has a graph showing Social Security is unfunded, this is clearly not true as I have already provided evidence for. Your attempt to
...means little when you're posting misleading information in the first place in order to make a scare-mongering argument about deficit reduction.
Is the US screwed? No. I've already told you why.
As for your misleading graph about taxes and revenue, note that they dropped from 9.4% to 6.7% over a 30 year period, a decline of almost one third.
Which of my 'fallacies' about SS do you specifically deny? None I'm guessing.
Also, it's not my fault that you don't understand what 'unfunded liabilities' are. It doesn't even compete with your point about SS being 'ok' for another 15 years. Unfunded liablities are calculated traditionally on a 75 year basis... to determine the long-term viability of various government programs. So, as the chart clearly states that in the next 75 years (~ the life of your children) the system will be short 7.9 Trillion dollars. Meaning, for the same payouts to continue, we'll have to come up with that amount of money to cover the difference. This difference is caused by a lessening number of payers and an increasing number of receivers... as I mentioned earlier when pointing out accurately how SS is a ponzi scheme.
...means little when you're posting misleading information in the first place in order to make a scare-mongering argument about deficit reduction.
Is the US screwed? No. I've already told you why.
As for your misleading graph about taxes and revenue, note that they dropped from 9.4% to 6.7% over a 30 year period, a decline of almost one third.
Which of my 'fallacies' about SS do you specifically deny? None I'm guessing.
Also, it's not my fault that you don't understand what 'unfunded liabilities' are. It doesn't even compete with your point about SS being 'ok' for another 15 years. Unfunded liablities are calculated traditionally on a 75 year basis... to determine the long-term viability of various government programs. So, as the chart clearly states that in the next 75 years (~ the life of your children) the system will be short 7.9 Trillion dollars. Meaning, for the same payouts to continue, we'll have to come up with that amount of money to cover the difference. This difference is caused by a lessening number of payers and an increasing number of receivers... as I mentioned earlier when pointing out accurately how SS is a ponzi scheme.
saabmp3
Sep 18, 06:09 PM
I use ameritrade, mainly on my PC. You need to pay extra for Level 2 tickers unless you make a certain amount of trades per month.
BEN
BEN
psychometry
Oct 5, 05:44 PM
I did, in fact, mean using JavaScript on page load to disable the user from changing the size of the textarea, not within my browser. It's like using CSS to disable the dotted border Firefox puts around links when they are active.
Form elements, and the divs that contain them, often need either fixed widths or have widths that are proportional to their containers.
Take Google (http://www.google.com). Depending on how the layout is set up (this is just hypothetical), resizing the search box would push those three links next to it off into oblivion if they were all in a div that was fixed or proportional to the page width. It doesn't matter if Safari "dynamically redraws the page" since the div would still be calculated to be the same. Worse yet, depending on its overflow attribute, they could be pushed onto a new line.
I'd really not like to see Safari become the next IE 5. It already has its share of JavaScript bugs. This would just mean us designers would have to spend that much more time envisioning what would happen if a user resized every form element on every page and incorporating it into our layouts. This is why I hope there's a way to disable it outright.
Form elements, and the divs that contain them, often need either fixed widths or have widths that are proportional to their containers.
Take Google (http://www.google.com). Depending on how the layout is set up (this is just hypothetical), resizing the search box would push those three links next to it off into oblivion if they were all in a div that was fixed or proportional to the page width. It doesn't matter if Safari "dynamically redraws the page" since the div would still be calculated to be the same. Worse yet, depending on its overflow attribute, they could be pushed onto a new line.
I'd really not like to see Safari become the next IE 5. It already has its share of JavaScript bugs. This would just mean us designers would have to spend that much more time envisioning what would happen if a user resized every form element on every page and incorporating it into our layouts. This is why I hope there's a way to disable it outright.
more...
YoNeX
Oct 31, 09:03 AM
You can probably get the shuffle early, I'm sure one of the retailers will accidently sell one to its customers or have already put it out on display.
revelated
Jan 20, 11:16 PM
Frankly I'm skeptical. I owned a 1999 Altima GXE with a manual transmition. Great great car for what it was. I'd still be driving it if some drunken moron in a truck hadn't totaled it. Anyways, my Altima was equipped with a different engine (KA24DE 4-cylinder, 2.4L) but was about the same size as your engine. It weighed slightly less, about 250lbs or so. Under normal driving conditions I could manage 30-31mpg combined cycle. On the highway, if I kept the speed down, I could do 35mpg (my best numbers were from a 360 mile trip @60mph - 39.5mpg). I had a 15.9 gallon tank, which meant I could get just about 500 miles on a tank of gas (I was brave once and drove 492 miles on one tank before I chickened out).
I don't know which year Altima you have, but you have a 20 gallon fuel tank and depending on what year, your EPA mileage is between 20-23 city and 27-32 highway. I'll grant you the 32mpg number because my Altima did better than the EPA numbers. 32mpg will get you 320 miles on half a tank. Heck, I'll even give you my best 39.5mpg number - but that still only gets you 395 miles on half a tank. In order to go 500 miles on half a tank of gas, you'd have to be getting 50mpg. And I don't believe that. I don't know of a single gasoline-powered car that can go 1000 miles on one full tank.
Here's the deal. You need to understand how gas burning really works. You also are not at liberty to speak on what is or is not possible on that trip without actually having driven it - as I have.
Mountains separate Phoenix and San Diego. Additionally, there is a long stretch where one can set cruise control at 80MPH, barely pushing the RPMs because it's in the highest gear. The mountains result in frequent instances of just coasting down, and with the exception of certain inclines, your acceleration is done by gas spurts rather than constant depressing of the accelerator. Less actual acceleration, less gas burned for the distance. Lower RPMs, less gas needed to propel the car. Use the car's momentum to keep it moving at a high speed without constant acceleration. Once I hit Arizona and the speed cameras and cops kicked in full force, I was limited to 65 MPH. That of course naturally increased my mileage since it took even less to move the car.
What I'm saying to you is that if one knows how to drive a car properly on freeways, you can hit mileage that exceeds what the car would normally be able to accomplish quite easily. It's city driving that drops that number significantly. Too many people are so hell bent on the numbers. The numbers don't mean jack in the real world and I don't know how many times I need to tell people that. The web is replete with stories of non-hybrid Altimas pushing 450+ miles. The key is how you drive, not the capacity of the tank or the rated MPG. It's the people who are lead footed that don't see the full potential of the car.
I don't know which year Altima you have, but you have a 20 gallon fuel tank and depending on what year, your EPA mileage is between 20-23 city and 27-32 highway. I'll grant you the 32mpg number because my Altima did better than the EPA numbers. 32mpg will get you 320 miles on half a tank. Heck, I'll even give you my best 39.5mpg number - but that still only gets you 395 miles on half a tank. In order to go 500 miles on half a tank of gas, you'd have to be getting 50mpg. And I don't believe that. I don't know of a single gasoline-powered car that can go 1000 miles on one full tank.
Here's the deal. You need to understand how gas burning really works. You also are not at liberty to speak on what is or is not possible on that trip without actually having driven it - as I have.
Mountains separate Phoenix and San Diego. Additionally, there is a long stretch where one can set cruise control at 80MPH, barely pushing the RPMs because it's in the highest gear. The mountains result in frequent instances of just coasting down, and with the exception of certain inclines, your acceleration is done by gas spurts rather than constant depressing of the accelerator. Less actual acceleration, less gas burned for the distance. Lower RPMs, less gas needed to propel the car. Use the car's momentum to keep it moving at a high speed without constant acceleration. Once I hit Arizona and the speed cameras and cops kicked in full force, I was limited to 65 MPH. That of course naturally increased my mileage since it took even less to move the car.
What I'm saying to you is that if one knows how to drive a car properly on freeways, you can hit mileage that exceeds what the car would normally be able to accomplish quite easily. It's city driving that drops that number significantly. Too many people are so hell bent on the numbers. The numbers don't mean jack in the real world and I don't know how many times I need to tell people that. The web is replete with stories of non-hybrid Altimas pushing 450+ miles. The key is how you drive, not the capacity of the tank or the rated MPG. It's the people who are lead footed that don't see the full potential of the car.
more...
solace
Oct 9, 03:15 PM
the 'Nearby' feature with the map is amazing :eek:
MacGeek7
Oct 14, 07:59 PM
Background from somewhere in InterfaceLift
more...
blevins321
Apr 7, 11:33 AM
That's 10 times the MONTHLY limit for a lot of people in the world.
Just be happy.
The USA is spoiled rotten.
Who has a 1-gig limit on their home internet?
Just be happy.
The USA is spoiled rotten.
Who has a 1-gig limit on their home internet?
psychometry
Oct 6, 12:17 AM
Resizable textarea's have been implemented in WebKit nightlies for a few months now but were turned off by default at some point.
For this to be included in a front page news item when its been publicly available for months is ludicrous.
Yeah, there haven't been any Page 2 rumors recently, either. At least half the stuff from the past 2 weeks should be there instead.
For this to be included in a front page news item when its been publicly available for months is ludicrous.
Yeah, there haven't been any Page 2 rumors recently, either. At least half the stuff from the past 2 weeks should be there instead.
more...
lspence7
May 1, 03:43 PM
Can someone help me find the wallpaper behind the window that is open?!?!?!
It is appreciated!
Picture credit to Most Addictive Game from the mac app store
:apple::apple::)
It is appreciated!
Picture credit to Most Addictive Game from the mac app store
:apple::apple::)
iApache
Sep 1, 11:01 AM
http://redreplicant.mylha.com/temp/dtop-aug31.jpg
Not a huge Hayden fan, but I love the Repsol color scheme. Hmm, weird. Not a huge Kawi fan but I still own an 09 zx6r. ;)
Wallpaper please? Thank you.
Not a huge Hayden fan, but I love the Repsol color scheme. Hmm, weird. Not a huge Kawi fan but I still own an 09 zx6r. ;)
Wallpaper please? Thank you.
more...
Lord Blackadder
Mar 16, 06:43 PM
It's impossible to be 100% certain is a crap response, because in many cases it is 100% certain, and i've named a few already.
That is false. Even lawyers agree that 100% certainty is impossible. That is why we have the term "reasonable doubt". The 5 men wrongly sentenced to death in Ohio went through what was supposed to be an exceptionally thorough legal process, yet it still failed them.
Also, the whole financial issue is very debatable and i don't think anyone here has solid figures on it.
An unconvincing statement. Prove it.
The only reason it may cost more to execute someone is because of all the appeals and court costs, this can easily be fixed so execution is the most economical way.
Stalin, Gaddafi and Kim Jong Il would agree. You're in good company there.
I'm not going any further into this because my stance that some people are unworthy of life won't change. Peace out girl scout.
Don't labor under the illusion that I or anyone else cares what you think. Frankly I do not. You've added nothing to this discussion but emotional responses and baiting, after which you've abandoned what is clearly a lost cause. I think that speaks for itself.
That is false. Even lawyers agree that 100% certainty is impossible. That is why we have the term "reasonable doubt". The 5 men wrongly sentenced to death in Ohio went through what was supposed to be an exceptionally thorough legal process, yet it still failed them.
Also, the whole financial issue is very debatable and i don't think anyone here has solid figures on it.
An unconvincing statement. Prove it.
The only reason it may cost more to execute someone is because of all the appeals and court costs, this can easily be fixed so execution is the most economical way.
Stalin, Gaddafi and Kim Jong Il would agree. You're in good company there.
I'm not going any further into this because my stance that some people are unworthy of life won't change. Peace out girl scout.
Don't labor under the illusion that I or anyone else cares what you think. Frankly I do not. You've added nothing to this discussion but emotional responses and baiting, after which you've abandoned what is clearly a lost cause. I think that speaks for itself.
jrko
Mar 30, 05:57 AM
Thanks zen.state. I'll look it up once the blasted screen turns up!
This thread http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1127873 is asking about drive sizes for PPC machines but the thread on the apple site pointed to doesn't seem to answer the question definitively - at least to me but I'm kinda new.
what is the max drive size for a PPC with with a ATA controller in one of the PCI slots?
This thread http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1127873 is asking about drive sizes for PPC machines but the thread on the apple site pointed to doesn't seem to answer the question definitively - at least to me but I'm kinda new.
what is the max drive size for a PPC with with a ATA controller in one of the PCI slots?
more...
MacNut
Nov 12, 09:03 PM
You don't need to know a year ahead of Apple's product launch dates to run your business. There are lots of professionals using 5 year old software to get their millions of dollars of worth work done. I like software upgrades as much as the next guy, but just because it's cool to install new stuff, not that I'll be able to do much more than I can do right now with the new software.Big business will turn over machines every 2 years wether they need it or not. They have to budget for new equipment so they need to know what is down the pipeline.
deadfrog
Dec 28, 03:20 PM
whats this all mean, could they be updating a january sale thing or does this mean new products?
anyones thoughts?
(would have posted on macrumors page but it wont allow me to!)
anyones thoughts?
(would have posted on macrumors page but it wont allow me to!)
more...
edesignuk
Feb 14, 01:46 PM
I wonder which new moderator is going to clean up the mess mymemmory just made in here...
A post likely to turn this into another mymemmory bashing thread -- and it's not even a thread about women or body parts. :(
That's probably true, but I can hardly delete it, then he'd report me for silencing my own critics :eek: :p
A post likely to turn this into another mymemmory bashing thread -- and it's not even a thread about women or body parts. :(
That's probably true, but I can hardly delete it, then he'd report me for silencing my own critics :eek: :p
Rowlander
Nov 23, 04:56 PM
Also, he's technically correct: Benjamin Button's budget was $150 million.
"Aliens vs Predator Requiem" was edited on Final Cut. But that movie was terrible. Maybe it was Final Cut�s fault. ;)
But in all seriousness: I think a new Final Cut version is clearly overdue. FCS3 was more like a feature-patch for FCS2 than a new version. These days not having any kind of native AVCHD support really slows you down (and uses up a lot of storage space) particularly considering the DSLR-hype since 2009!
I remember a friend of mine who had bought a Panasonic HMC 150 (which is a professional camera) before FCS3 was released and was expecting native AVCHD in the next release. He has been waiting for this feature for almost two years now, while all the other big editing systems have had it for a while, as far as I know!
"Aliens vs Predator Requiem" was edited on Final Cut. But that movie was terrible. Maybe it was Final Cut�s fault. ;)
But in all seriousness: I think a new Final Cut version is clearly overdue. FCS3 was more like a feature-patch for FCS2 than a new version. These days not having any kind of native AVCHD support really slows you down (and uses up a lot of storage space) particularly considering the DSLR-hype since 2009!
I remember a friend of mine who had bought a Panasonic HMC 150 (which is a professional camera) before FCS3 was released and was expecting native AVCHD in the next release. He has been waiting for this feature for almost two years now, while all the other big editing systems have had it for a while, as far as I know!
mcdj
Mar 27, 08:58 PM
Lets all quit feeding the troll, no one ever said they were going to visit him.
And even if one of his victims wanted to meet him to straighten things out peacefully, and he invited them to his house, and shot them, he would need to prove the person meant to harm or kill him, which given the victim came in peace with no weapon or intent, is impossible, that dumbass will be in jail before he's 25 cause he thinks he can shoot people for fun.
yeah by the sounds of him, we'll be reading about him in the police blotter or obits sooner than later. good riddance.
And even if one of his victims wanted to meet him to straighten things out peacefully, and he invited them to his house, and shot them, he would need to prove the person meant to harm or kill him, which given the victim came in peace with no weapon or intent, is impossible, that dumbass will be in jail before he's 25 cause he thinks he can shoot people for fun.
yeah by the sounds of him, we'll be reading about him in the police blotter or obits sooner than later. good riddance.
DeusInvictus7
Dec 1, 01:03 PM
Marvel pic
Go Marvel!
Here's mine:
Go Marvel!
Here's mine:
Heijtink
Apr 6, 01:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It'll take you little over 111 days to download it's entire capacity via Thunderbolt.
It'll take you little over 111 days to download it's entire capacity via Thunderbolt.
iSamurai
Apr 25, 12:07 AM
They should offer conversion kits especially when the polls show so many black iPhone owners are already sticking with their current iPhone.
azurehi
Mar 23, 01:51 PM
Its funny how every position at Apple is either a Vice President or Senior Vice President of something... hehe..
It's like the FBI...Everyone is a Special Agent. Whoops, guess They opened a file on me now, or added to my present one :eek:
It's like the FBI...Everyone is a Special Agent. Whoops, guess They opened a file on me now, or added to my present one :eek:
forcefieldkid
Sep 3, 08:02 AM
Simple and clean, how I'd like my mind to be lately
http://img547.imageshack.us/img547/2496/picture1ci.jpg
http://img547.imageshack.us/img547/2496/picture1ci.jpg
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder