I live in Fairfax, have inquired about getting FiOS several times, and it's only available within a few small areas within Fairfax. Not even a tentative schedule for deployment to my community, which is right beside a Metro station.
Nice teaser of a headline, Mike. But to make it clear to everyone else, the principles of economics aren't screwy in the virtual world... they're exactly the same as in the real world. Misunderstanding of the principles of economics in the virtual world, however, is very screwy. But then, that's the same in the real world too!
BTW, Lewis, "steaming pile of legislature" is a gem. Thanks for the laugh.
Excellent post and discussion... very enjoyable, and I'm very much looking forward to the next installment.
Scarcity is always at the heart of selling -- not necessarily of economics.
I agree. I don't think any single concept defines a "heart" of economics, but if I had to pick one concept as slightly dominant, I'd say Economics is the science of incentives.
**Actually, it should be made up several people, including a majority of people who are indepedants.
Please note that I said at least two fully qualified people, which should be true even if there were no political parties. A larger number, and a larger representation of interests would indeed promote a more accurate accounting, and "independents" should be welcome in the process.
However, no voting system should depend on the independent-ness of any particular people, as independents tend to favor one side or another on specific issues, and favor one candidate in a choice between specific candidates.
The best system is the one that provides secret vote-casting and the highest degree of accuracy in recording voters' intensions, regardless of time or expense: Paper ballots with candidates' photos, names, and party affiliation, marked by each voter with ink and folded in a private voting booth, deposited in a collection box outside the booth, and numerous observers of everything outside the voting booth. The time is takes to manually count ballots is irrelevant: the winners don't take office until months later. And the expense? Please... how expensive is voting machine equipment that is suspect or fails altogether?
As you should always have at least two people when money is being counted as a matter of policy, regardless of how trustworthy the people are, the voting process should be treated just as carefully, and no person, and no company, should be trusted.
Voting software should be trusted by no one. Voting hardware should be trusted by no one. At least two fully qualified people, one from each political camp, should monitor all software and hardware from its creation until it is retired from service. Fully qualified means understanding every line of code in the software, and every circuit in the hardware.
What benefit is there to computerized voting machines? Speed? That's no benefit except to satisfy a totally unimportant, impatient media. Reduced cost? Not if a verifiable paper trail has to exist in addition to it... its cost is imposed on top of a paper-based system. And if you add qualified supervision of the system, voting machines are far more expensive than a paper based system.
I see no worthwhile benefits, and an extreme danger to our most precious democratic republic.
Polling officials don't understand the technology, and are buying "a pig in a poke," so its no surprise that they don't get what they were told they were getting. The rest of us have to make sure that the voting officials' desire to trust the machine venders is overridden.
The blog at elfink.blogspot.com is copyrighted, and absolutely no use of it qualifies as "fair." In fact, you are not allowed to read my blog without prior written permission, and you must have my verbal permission to read the written permission.
Furthermore, the designs on the t-shirts I sell at www.cafepress.com/elfink are also copyrighted, and I hereby declare by fiat that any and all purchases of said t-shirts only entitles the buyer to receive the shirt and hide it in a closet. You may not wear or use any Elf Ink products unless you hire 3 union elves during the entire process of wearing or using.
Everyone in my family will be voting by absentee ballot, specifically to avoid voting machines. They are a greater danger to democracy than terrorists.
Baseball is not national security or a health care profession... no lives hang in the balance of a decision. It's entertainment! And it sounds far more entertaining to allow fan participation in relatively minor management decisions. I'd enjoy watching that more, even if I wasn't one of the fans participating.
Besides, the fans aren't involved in more important decisions like hiring, firing, or salary negotiations.
And since many decisions made by baseball managers are completely arbitrary, such as exactly when to relieve a pitcher, I dare say that many decisions made by fan consensus will be just as good as a professional manager's, on average. But even if they aren't, so what? The purpose is to have fun.
Actually, the purpose is for the fans to have fun. If you don't think so, see how many professional baseball players you can get to play full time for free -- just for the fun of it. Not enough for a team, I'll bet. So since the fans are paying for the ball players, give them their money's worth!
"Grand jury", "subpoena", backtracking/tracing, and "proof"?? Waaay too expensive and troublesome for the RIAA. What's wrong with random selection? That's a lot easier and seems to be working well, except in the case of one overly-sensitive millionaire...
>>Who the hell makes these bonehead decisions and how the hell do they get to be in a position to make them?
>The reason for this kind of decision: three letters -
MBA: Mindless Business [idiots]
Next up: Ads offering to tell you how people voted by tapping into "secure" voting databases. And of course, they can't be convicted of a crime, since the voting systems will never store who votes for whom.
Original script --> "condensed" --> 12 minutes that are derivative.
They didn't shoot twelve pages of the script. They rewrote 120 pages down to 12 pages. You condense that much, it's extremely condensed, it's derivative, and shot on a $0 budget makes it a parody, whether they intended a parody or not.
No worries, they have fairness built-in: "...any website the contents of which may, in the opinion of the Access Copyright, be damaging or cause harm..."
See, if we all just trust everyone else's judgements and opinions, then, uh... never mind.
Monarch, when taking those tests where you read an article and then have to choose the main point of the article, did you ever get one of those right?
WATYF's main point is, to repeat yet again, "you either need to draw a line and enforce it, or don't bother drawing one at all. 'Change the channel' is the same as 'don't bother drawing a line'."
I've got no problem with NYC firing someone for personal web surfing during business hours. As long as they fire everyone who does so. Let's see, that would be... every NYC employee with access to a computer at work... including the Mayor.
On the post: Verizon Blows Network Upgrade Money At The Mall
Think smaller
I want fiber!
On the post: In A World Where Everything Is Digital, Economics Gets Screwy Fast
That scwewy wabbit!
Nice teaser of a headline, Mike. But to make it clear to everyone else, the principles of economics aren't screwy in the virtual world... they're exactly the same as in the real world. Misunderstanding of the principles of economics in the virtual world, however, is very screwy. But then, that's the same in the real world too!
BTW, Lewis, "steaming pile of legislature" is a gem. Thanks for the laugh.
On the post: The Importance Of Zero In Destroying The Scarcity Myth Of Economics
Excellent
Excellent post and discussion... very enjoyable, and I'm very much looking forward to the next installment.
Scarcity is always at the heart of selling -- not necessarily of economics.
I agree. I don't think any single concept defines a "heart" of economics, but if I had to pick one concept as slightly dominant, I'd say Economics is the science of incentives.
On the post: In Retrospect The Bubble Doesn't Look So Bad
New Economy
On the post: FTC Finally Throws The Book At Zango
It's in their nature...
On the post: Diebold Trying To Stop Documentary On E-Voting Problems; Complains About Wrong Film
Re: 2 camps?
**Actually, it should be made up several people, including a majority of people who are indepedants.
Please note that I said at least two fully qualified people, which should be true even if there were no political parties. A larger number, and a larger representation of interests would indeed promote a more accurate accounting, and "independents" should be welcome in the process.
However, no voting system should depend on the independent-ness of any particular people, as independents tend to favor one side or another on specific issues, and favor one candidate in a choice between specific candidates.
The best system is the one that provides secret vote-casting and the highest degree of accuracy in recording voters' intensions, regardless of time or expense: Paper ballots with candidates' photos, names, and party affiliation, marked by each voter with ink and folded in a private voting booth, deposited in a collection box outside the booth, and numerous observers of everything outside the voting booth. The time is takes to manually count ballots is irrelevant: the winners don't take office until months later. And the expense? Please... how expensive is voting machine equipment that is suspect or fails altogether?
On the post: Diebold Trying To Stop Documentary On E-Voting Problems; Complains About Wrong Film
Always verify
As you should always have at least two people when money is being counted as a matter of policy, regardless of how trustworthy the people are, the voting process should be treated just as carefully, and no person, and no company, should be trusted.
Voting software should be trusted by no one. Voting hardware should be trusted by no one. At least two fully qualified people, one from each political camp, should monitor all software and hardware from its creation until it is retired from service. Fully qualified means understanding every line of code in the software, and every circuit in the hardware.
What benefit is there to computerized voting machines? Speed? That's no benefit except to satisfy a totally unimportant, impatient media. Reduced cost? Not if a verifiable paper trail has to exist in addition to it... its cost is imposed on top of a paper-based system. And if you add qualified supervision of the system, voting machines are far more expensive than a paper based system.
I see no worthwhile benefits, and an extreme danger to our most precious democratic republic.
Polling officials don't understand the technology, and are buying "a pig in a poke," so its no surprise that they don't get what they were told they were getting. The rest of us have to make sure that the voting officials' desire to trust the machine venders is overridden.
On the post: Can You Sue For Defamation If Someone Points Out Publicly That You Are Wrong?
Some Rights Restricted
The blog at elfink.blogspot.com is copyrighted, and absolutely no use of it qualifies as "fair." In fact, you are not allowed to read my blog without prior written permission, and you must have my verbal permission to read the written permission.
Furthermore, the designs on the t-shirts I sell at www.cafepress.com/elfink are also copyrighted, and I hereby declare by fiat that any and all purchases of said t-shirts only entitles the buyer to receive the shirt and hide it in a closet. You may not wear or use any Elf Ink products unless you hire 3 union elves during the entire process of wearing or using.
On the post: Diebold Hid Faulty Machines From Elections Board
Absentee
On the post: New Anti-Online Gambling Law Won't Do Much To Stop Addicts; But May (Briefly) Protect Suckers
Poker isn't gambling...
On the post: Forget Fantasy Baseball, Use The Internet To Actually Manage A Team
Great Idea!!
Baseball is not national security or a health care profession... no lives hang in the balance of a decision. It's entertainment! And it sounds far more entertaining to allow fan participation in relatively minor management decisions. I'd enjoy watching that more, even if I wasn't one of the fans participating.
Besides, the fans aren't involved in more important decisions like hiring, firing, or salary negotiations.
And since many decisions made by baseball managers are completely arbitrary, such as exactly when to relieve a pitcher, I dare say that many decisions made by fan consensus will be just as good as a professional manager's, on average. But even if they aren't, so what? The purpose is to have fun.
Actually, the purpose is for the fans to have fun. If you don't think so, see how many professional baseball players you can get to play full time for free -- just for the fun of it. Not enough for a team, I'll bet. So since the fans are paying for the ball players, give them their money's worth!
On the post: Latest Threat To The Music Industry: CDs
I am alarmed!
Surely, music without DRM spells the end of Western Civilization.
Although I sure get tired of looking up the all the artists and agencies I have to pay every time I absent-mindedly hum a copyrighted tune...
On the post: How The FBI Tracks Down An Online Criminal
On the post: New Casino Business Model: Any Time Someone Wins, Blame The Software
Yin/Yang
On the post: National Semiconductor Takes Back Gift iPods
3 letter explanation
On the post: So We're Just Supposed To Accept That Voter Databases Are Secure?
Only $50!
On the post: Paramount Worried It Can't Compete With A Bunch Of Amateurs
The same, only different?
Original script --> "condensed" --> 12 minutes that are derivative.
They didn't shoot twelve pages of the script. They rewrote 120 pages down to 12 pages. You condense that much, it's extremely condensed, it's derivative, and shot on a $0 budget makes it a parody, whether they intended a parody or not.
On the post: Captain Copyright Is Captain Copycat?
Checks and Balances
No worries, they have fairness built-in: "...any website the contents of which may, in the opinion of the Access Copyright, be damaging or cause harm..."
See, if we all just trust everyone else's judgements and opinions, then, uh... never mind.
On the post: FCC's Martin Hates Regulation, Except When It Suits Him Politically
Re: Re: Hrmm... by Monarch
Monarch, when taking those tests where you read an article and then have to choose the main point of the article, did you ever get one of those right?
WATYF's main point is, to repeat yet again, "you either need to draw a line and enforce it, or don't bother drawing one at all. 'Change the channel' is the same as 'don't bother drawing a line'."
On the post: NYC Employee Fired For Surfing The Web, Despite Judge Disagreeing
Consistency
I've got no problem with NYC firing someone for personal web surfing during business hours. As long as they fire everyone who does so. Let's see, that would be... every NYC employee with access to a computer at work... including the Mayor.
Next >>