onetwothreefour

What I'd like to understand is why governments in any country that isn't the US would agree to any of this stuff. I think that's the real question here.

It's not. It has an improved database engine and a new UI. That's pretty much it.

The assumption that the DV lottery only brings in low skill labor is both insulting and wrong.

The title of the article strikes me as one written by a Republican. This is a terrible bill, that's why it's not being signed.

Thanks for weighing in with your uninformed opinion on something while also invoking the age old "when the US economy is doing very poorly" straw man which has nothing to do with the DV lottery.

Those DV lottery winners pay US taxes while having no citizenship rights, so you have literally no idea what you're talking about.

And?

Linux kernels also do that memory thing (and have done it for years), just FYI. Either through MCE or EDAC. Not really that special.

Pro-tip: use ECC memory on servers. The end.

And?

You don't know what you're talking about.

Immigration costs close to $10-15K if it's a real move. Without a US credit history, you're going to have to put down a lot of deposits just to get basic things done like getting a credit card.

That's basically a monetary DoS. :)

I don't see how limited liability is an argument for double taxation when 9/10 Western democracies have franking credit systems that eliminate the double taxation on corporate profits paid to owners (and I'm only addressing this from a startup owner perspective, since this is HN).

The simple fact is that the US has something like this already, with qualified dividends taxed at 15% to try to reduce the burden of double taxation. That's still not low enough.

The point is moot when you start talking about S Corps since those offer the same limited liability while passing through the tax burden onto the shareholders directly.

You don't really have enough insight into this (apart from "regulation bad") to continue the argument. Taxis work fine in a lot of places, there's a reason for their regulation, and that's fine.

Uber is a private car service. That's what they should stick to. Taking on taxis on multiple fronts (different cities, states, countries) is a losing (and, quite frankly, boring) proposition.

The problem, in this case, is attempting to apply SF-sourced corporatism-as-libertarianism to places other than SF. Good luck with that (and I say this as a person who uses Uber as my sole method of transportation, several times a week).

Hehe. Yeah. Most people don't realise that the US has insanely high taxes for almost zero in return. Plus, double taxation on corporate profits.

Most sane countries have things like franking credits where owners only pay to top up from the corporate rate to the personal rate. You can sort of get around this in the US with a S Corp, but you're still paying something like ~50% for zero social services.

Let's not forget world wide taxation and other arcane issues in the US tax code.

Sigh... :)

I'm pretty sure a lot of people are running Linux and the world's largest websites...

Just saying.

The problem with the Kindle is the very poor software experience. I don't see that changing any time soon.

What you're saying is people should work because... they should work, regardless of pay, conditions, etc. People have choices.

Clearly, the reasons are far more nuanced than what you're going to get from an article. This company has gone through bankruptcy twice before.

You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

People really need to stop referencing things that happened 200+ years ago as if they were relevant now.

Some interesting questions, sure, but some very flawed questions also.

Sigh. Mockups aren't a product.

This graphic doesn't take into account the gaming going on. I.e., people from other states wanting Texas to secede.

I'm pretty sure a certain president was impeached for similar issues...

What a US court thinks is irrelevant in the UK, and has zero bearing on the Apple UK site. Thank $DIETY the USPTO is confined to where it is.

If Apple doesn't want to comply with laws, they shouldn't operate in those countries.

That said, it was obvious they'd get chewed out for this from when they posted it (if you know anything about UK law). It's okay to be smug and they would have probably gotten away with everything except the very last paragraph.

The last paragraph was completely unnecessary, and now they're facing the consequences of their hubris.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but it has that in its name?

You can also apply for the lottery, so what's the problem?

It's called a diversity visa for a reason. To add diversity.

These are just a dump of the .lproj/.strings on an OS X/iOS system. So technically, Apple owns the copyright on them, and this app is merely presenting them for educational purposes. Also, the licensing is dubious at best.

He didn't. Just the usual HN Gruber bashing.

Instant Approval with a personal credit check... doesn't say if it's a hard or soft pull.

I wasn't accusing anyone of anything. Unless calling you delusional is an accusation.

So let me get this straight. Google's entire reason for not supplying LTE is global availability, and yet, one barely used feature on one carrier is apparently what stopped them from shipping it? Oooookay. Verizon and Wallet have nothing to do this with decision. Zero. Verizon doesn't exist outside the US, just so you know.

For any Android fanboy to not decry the lack of LTE is hypocritical at best. The wholesale cost difference between a HSDPA part and a LTE part is negligible at best. There's zero downside to providing a LTE part because it's also a superset of 3G/HSDPA/etc.

There's maybe a technical reason for not including it, and instead of the BS justification that Google are trying to sell us, I'd love to hear it. It'd be far more believable than the current "you don't really need it" reasoning being thrown about.

So yes, you're delusional. You're attempting to justify why LTE isn't included in a flagship phone in Oct 2012. Good luck with that.

You are utterly delusional my friend. This is laziness.

You're only surprised because you're comparing a spec sheet to another spec sheet. And it's not thinner and lighter. And you don't know if the screen is actually going to look better. And it doesn't have LTE (no matter what the excuse).

Additionally, the Nexus 10 is massive, is ugly as hell, runs Android and thus has like 10 apps designed for a Android tablet.

I own every Nexus device in existence and every iOS device, so that's where I'm coming from. The Nexus 7 was a waste of money.