On 11/10/2019 03:09 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/10/2019 3:30 PM, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 10:17:23 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 11/10/2019 8:11 AM, devnull wrote:
On 11/10/2019 7:12 AM, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 03:27:23 -0600, Roscoe
wrote:

Bernie or Liz I think asked that and it got me thinking. A
billion
is a thousand thousands. Does anyone really need to be a
billionaire?

No, a billion is a thousand millions. A million is a thousand
thousands.
Yes, sociopaths NEED to be billionaires. To compensate for
their tiny dicks.
[]'s


So if you won a billion in the lottery, how much would you donate to
poor welfarecrats? 999,000,000?

Good question. I'd take care of my family, but I could never spend that
much money. It would be fun to give it away and do some good. The hard
part would be sifting the needy from the fraudsters.
Not all that hard to find 5 or 10 stellar charities to endow - where
the money would be wel put to use.

I think you'd have to do that. It would be more fun to give smaller
amounts to many people that just need a little boost, but that would be
extremely difficult and time consuming. There are a couple of charities
I donate to now but modestly.


You mean you don't want to remake 'The Millionaire' ? I tend to donate
to the local food bank and the homeless shelter. I suppose some of the
recipients might be 'welfarecrats' but that isn't the point. Neither
operation requires you to pray for your supper.

On Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 10:29:19 AM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...

If you look at the history of the 'giants' around the start
of the century you can see how they sort of stole the
millions then which would convet to billions now.

Even the most flagrant monopolistic practices arent really stealing.




If the following hapened to you would you call it stealing or just good
business practice.


I keep harping on this.

I worked for a large company. The Kochs bought it. Changed the
retirement. When I first started , the retirement rule was you could
retire anytime after 55 years old. The company would pay 80 % of your
insurance and you would get 100 % of your retirement.

Koch bought it. Recended the 55 age, you had to be 62 to start getting
your reirement money and no medical insurance. Another company bought
the company. The then proceeded to change the retirement and cut out 2
weeks of vacation for those that had been there over 20 years and had
been getting 6 weeks of vacation. In all, I had to work an extra 2
years from my planning and even at that it cost me $ 500 a month in
retirement money.

I say they stole 2 years of my life and $ 500 a month.

I would say you're right if they guaranteed to you that they would never
change the retirement metrics or benefits. In the private sector, retiring
at 55 with a full pension is a rarity. And if competitors aren't offering
it, they have lower costs. Things like that are what helped bust Detroit.
But I'm betting they never guaranteed it. If I was running it, I would
have tried to come up with some transition, so that those nearing retirement
are not affected as much, if at all. But that's me and it may make them
less than desirable employers, but I don't see how it's stealing. A lot
of employees have faired far worse, eg the company goes bust.

On 11/10/2019 6:12 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article , says...

Has the CDs paid any interest worth while in years ?

The few times I looked into them , it was hardly worth the gas to ride
to the bank to set one up.

I got a couple this year at 2.54%. Better than a saving account.



Are they for 1 year or 5 years ?

If you have to tie up money for 5 years, I would never do that.

Inflation seems to be 2.4% for 2018 and 1.7 % for the last 12 months.

Still the 2.54 % is hardly with the time and gas for me, especially if
for 5 years.


These are one year. I was not sure what to do with the money so it was
a safe place and would make at least a few bucks. End of term it may go
into a different investment.

What I'm not sure about is what do do with some money that I want to
keep liquid for easy access. Saving account is near zero. Money market
is better, but if the balance drops below $10k there is a $17/month
charge. It may only be a month or two a year after paying taxes,
insurance, etc balance could drop and quickly for a couple of months
wiping out the gains. Just does not seem right to have over 10k in an
account and get 19 cents interest.

On Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 2:01:32 PM UTC-5, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 06:03:23 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, November 9, 2019 at 6:44:23 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...
Not too many billions were earned totally ethically. More were
basically "stolen" - one way or the other.

Cite for us the many examples of American billionaires where they stole it.

Gates did with Microsoft.

He sold IBM on a system that he did not really have.

He markeded his system for $ 49.99 or so and Digital Research was about
$ 150.

So it's now a crime to offer a better or similar product at a lower price
than a competitor? WTF?

He STOLE the code from the competitor, and sold it to IBM.

That's pure BS. Gates bought what became MS-DOS from Seattle Computer.





After he made hundreds of millions, he settled for a fraction of what
he made (he settled out of court)..
PM.HThttp://www.digitalresearch.biz/CM
Ancient history.

Except that you have it wrong. AFAIK MSFT was never sued by Digital Research
for "stealing" MS-DOS. DRI was sold and years later the new company sued
MSFT for a variety of issues related to how they were licensing and competing
in the marketplace, but not for "stealing" the code.



Gate was never a competent coder. He could barely write BASIC.

Irrelevant of course. Gates was a better visionary and businessman.
Gary Kildall was approached FIRST by IBM. He couldn't reach an agreement
with them, refusing to sell CP/M to them outright. So, IBM went looking
elsewhere and Gates was willing to sell it to them. Gates then bought
an OS similar to CP/M from Seattle computer. If this is stealing then
it's done all the time, eg Compaq and all the IBM clone makers, "stole"
the PC from IBM. If Kildall believed Seattle Computer or MSFT had stolen
anything from him and he had a legitimate case, he would have brought it
at the time. He didn't. The rest is sour grapes and revisionist history.
I'm sure Kildall wishes he wasn't so pig headed and had made the deal with
IBM.



Just another "They trust me, stupid fscks"
The original author of DOS died from head injuries. They are
still looking for the murderer. Does Gates own a hammer?

Oh, please. Any more nonsense?


[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

In article , says...

What I'm not sure about is what do do with some money that I want to
keep liquid for easy access. Saving account is near zero. Money market
is better, but if the balance drops below $10k there is a $17/month
charge. It may only be a month or two a year after paying taxes,
insurance, etc balance could drop and quickly for a couple of months
wiping out the gains. Just does not seem right to have over 10k in an
account and get 19 cents interest.




My credit union gives a 1 % interest on the money market account.
However there is no minimum deposit required. Just $ 5 to keep the
account open. Not much of a rate. The CD rates are not much better
for less than 2 years. I probably make/save more money by paying the
bills on line than mailing them in. The savings is in the few dollars
of stamps it would cost to mail.

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 07:58:18 +1100, "Ray" wrote:



"Clare Snyder" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 17:31:29 +1100, "Ray" wrote:



"Clare Snyder" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 14:39:43 +1100, "Ray" wrote:



"Clare Snyder" wrote in message
om...
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 15:53:32 -0500, Wade Garrett
wrote:

On 11/9/19 4:27 AM, Roscoe wrote:
Bernie or Liz I think asked that and it got me thinking. A
billion
is a thousand thousands. Does anyone really need to be a
billionaire?

If the rich didn't create all that wealth-- who would the liberals
take
it from?
It is inaccurate to say the rich "create" wealth. They "accumulate"
wealth

Some like Gates and Bezos do create wealth by
producing what some choose to use or consume.

And they are the minority.

Yes, billionaires will always be a tiny minority.

It isnt clear that only a minority of billionaires do create wealth.

Gates is also in the minority in how he uses his wealth.

That's true, plenty of billionaires are only billionaires
in the sense that they own lots of stock in the operation
they produced. But producing that operation did produce
lots of wealth and almost always lots of jobs too.

Yes, some like Soros and Koch brats didn't.

Do your homework.

Have done that.

Among the true billionaires they are in the
majority - I mean Soros and Koch and their ilk.

What do you mean by true billionaires as opposed to the billionaires who
aren't. 'true' billionaires ?


Wanabees like Thumper

More billionaires are made by moving wealth than creating it.

That's very arguable.

On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 15:51:11 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 11/10/2019 01:44 PM, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 12:20:59 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 11/10/2019 06:10 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 5:23:34 AM UTC-5, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 23:40:37 -0700, rbowman wrote:



Yeah, I'm a dinosaur and I never quite got the whole service economy
thing. Gates, or I should say Microsoft, does create software. Even that
is very intangible. I've been in the software game for about 40 years
and I'm not sure anything I've done was all that necessary or even had a
positive effect.

I spent 30 years writing code. I doubt there's a line of it in use today.

You might have been writing the wrong sort of code. I know some aircraft
companies still using 30-year-old Fortran code (or older). If it ain't
broke....

NOAA has a treasure trove of code that can be adapted -- if you speak
FORTRAN.

https://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/waves/wavewatch/

At least this package is FORTRAN 90. I've worked with some that is still
77.

As a side note, f2c takes perfectly good FORTRAN code and produces a
steaming pile of **** that vaguely looks like C.


You mean it produces about the same caliber of "C" code as many
recently minted "C" programmers??? With processor power and ram so
cheap today nobody puts the effort into writing compact efficient code
any more. Or properly documenting theior code either.


No, I mean it's pretty much unreadable. It may compile and function but
it is not maintainable.
Like I said - just like half the c code being written today. Compact
efficient well documented code is easy to maintain. (because it is
easy to read)

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:09:56 +1100, "Ray" wrote:



"rbowman" wrote in message
...
On 11/10/2019 12:26 PM, Ray wrote:
Of course it does, but Amazon also enriches authors too.

Check with some of the authors...

Don’t need to, it obviously does enrich
some of the more successful authors.


It enriches SOME more than traditional publishing - certainly not all.
Bezos and co makes more than the author

"Clare Snyder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:09:56 +1100, "Ray" wrote:



"rbowman" wrote in message
...
On 11/10/2019 12:26 PM, Ray wrote:
Of course it does, but Amazon also enriches authors too.

Check with some of the authors...

Don't need to, it obviously does enrich
some of the more successful authors.


It enriches SOME more than traditional publishing - certainly not all.

No one ever said all.

Bezos and co makes more than the author

Depends on what the author chooses to
charge for the ebook and how well it sells.

On 11/10/2019 04:29 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...

Some of ours is pushing that age. I always feel like an archaeologist
when I go hunting bugs preserved in amber. Many of them come from
'optimizations' that may have made sense back then. I found one where
the programmer did a 'good enough' hypotenuse calculating because he
didn't want to include the math library. To his credit it took over 20
years before anyone noticed.




Sort of like some bugs in Microsoft . They had one in there caclulator
about the time windows 3.11 came out. Went something like if you
entered 3.11 and subtracted 3.1 from it, you got 0 instead of .01. That
may not be the exact numbers, but should be close.

Took them a long time to own up to it and correct it.



Floating point numbers are tricky. People who count pennies, like
bankers, use fixed point. BCD was popular back when but I think it's
been mostly phased out.

On 11/10/2019 04:09 PM, Ray wrote:


"rbowman" wrote in message
...
On 11/10/2019 12:26 PM, Ray wrote:
Of course it does, but Amazon also enriches authors too.

Check with some of the authors...

Don’t need to, it obviously does enrich
some of the more successful authors.

That has always been the case. You've almost stated a tautology although
I suppose a successful author may not accumulate wealth if their
preference leans toward booze and blow.

I do think becoming a Kindle author with limited success is slightly
less costly than the vanity press route. When the publisher returned the
unsold volumes of 'A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers' to him
Thoreau remarked that he had a library of a thousand books, seven
hundred of which he had written..

On 11/10/2019 05:49 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article , says...

What I'm not sure about is what do do with some money that I want to
keep liquid for easy access. Saving account is near zero. Money market
is better, but if the balance drops below $10k there is a $17/month
charge. It may only be a month or two a year after paying taxes,
insurance, etc balance could drop and quickly for a couple of months
wiping out the gains. Just does not seem right to have over 10k in an
account and get 19 cents interest.




My credit union gives a 1 % interest on the money market account.
However there is no minimum deposit required. Just $ 5 to keep the
account open. Not much of a rate. The CD rates are not much better
for less than 2 years. I probably make/save more money by paying the
bills on line than mailing them in. The savings is in the few dollars
of stamps it would cost to mail.


The credit union I went to has a 6 month CD with 2.3%.

On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 22:40:10 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 11/10/2019 04:29 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...

Some of ours is pushing that age. I always feel like an archaeologist
when I go hunting bugs preserved in amber. Many of them come from
'optimizations' that may have made sense back then. I found one where
the programmer did a 'good enough' hypotenuse calculating because he
didn't want to include the math library. To his credit it took over 20
years before anyone noticed.




Sort of like some bugs in Microsoft . They had one in there caclulator
about the time windows 3.11 came out. Went something like if you
entered 3.11 and subtracted 3.1 from it, you got 0 instead of .01. That
may not be the exact numbers, but should be close.

Took them a long time to own up to it and correct it.



Floating point numbers are tricky. People who count pennies, like
bankers, use fixed point. BCD was popular back when but I think it's
been mostly phased out.

The problem was in the numeric processor chip which was made by Intel
- not in Microsoft code. Microsoft wrote a work-around if I remember
correctly, but the real fix was the next generation floating point
processor

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 14:58:49 +1100, Ray, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


Bezos and co makes more than the author

Depends on what the author chooses to
charge for the ebook and how well it sells.

No, it doesn't senile idiot!

--
Keema Nam addressing nym-shifting senile Rodent:
"You are now exposed as a liar, as well as an ignorant troll."
"MID: .com"

"rbowman" wrote in message
...
On 11/10/2019 04:09 PM, Ray wrote:


"rbowman" wrote in message
...
On 11/10/2019 12:26 PM, Ray wrote:
Of course it does, but Amazon also enriches authors too.

Check with some of the authors...

Don’t need to, it obviously does enrich
some of the more successful authors.

That has always been the case.

Duh.

You've almost stated a tautology

Bull****.

although I suppose a successful author may not accumulate wealth if their
preference leans toward booze and blow.

Duh.

I do think becoming a Kindle author with limited success is slightly less
costly than the vanity press route.

Irrelevant to whether the more successful authors do accumulate wealth,

When the publisher returned the unsold volumes of 'A Week on the Concord
and Merrimack Rivers' to him Thoreau remarked that he had a library of a
thousand books, seven hundred of which he had written..

Irrelevant to whether the more successful authors do accumulate wealth,

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 20:58:58 +1100, Ray, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

FLUSH troll****

You clinically insane, senile, trolling piece of ****!

--
FredXX to Rot Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shipped the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

In article ,
says...

The problem was in the numeric processor chip which was made by Intel
- not in Microsoft code. Microsoft wrote a work-around if I remember
correctly, but the real fix was the next generation floating point
processor



The way I remember it there were two problems.

One with the a certin generation of processor chips (that did not
effect the 3.11 - 3.10 problem) and then the actual code used used in
the Microsoft calulator that was in error no matter what processor was
used.


https://www.techradar.com/news/compu...ssors/pentium-
fdiv-the-processor-bug-that-shook-the-world-1270773

On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 2:22:47 AM UTC-5, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 22:40:10 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 11/10/2019 04:29 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article ,
says...

Some of ours is pushing that age. I always feel like an archaeologist
when I go hunting bugs preserved in amber. Many of them come from
'optimizations' that may have made sense back then. I found one where
the programmer did a 'good enough' hypotenuse calculating because he
didn't want to include the math library. To his credit it took over 20
years before anyone noticed.




Sort of like some bugs in Microsoft . They had one in there caclulator
about the time windows 3.11 came out. Went something like if you
entered 3.11 and subtracted 3.1 from it, you got 0 instead of .01. That
may not be the exact numbers, but should be close.

Took them a long time to own up to it and correct it.



Floating point numbers are tricky. People who count pennies, like
bankers, use fixed point. BCD was popular back when but I think it's
been mostly phased out.

The problem was in the numeric processor chip which was made by Intel
- not in Microsoft code. Microsoft wrote a work-around if I remember
correctly, but the real fix was the next generation floating point
processor

Baloney. The glaring problem Bowman is describing, if it existed in the MSFT
calculator, had nothing to do with the Intel floating point problem.
That problem never affected common, business math or even 99.99% of
scientific math. It was some obscure calculations that rarely occur.
And Intel fixed it ASAP, with a revision to the existing Pentium, not
in the next generation.