Marty4650

Marty4650

Lives in United States NC, United States
Works as a Retired Industrial Engineer
Joined on May 20, 2005

Comments

Total: 659, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

camfan1: Illegal immigration can not and will never be solved by "social justice" alone.
That assumption is based on the idea that all people and nations act and behave the same.
This is complete nonsense.
There is a reason why things are as they are.
If you don't believe me come and have a look here in my Belgian paradise to see what some 'cultures' will bring to your once peaceful society and living environment.
You may be amazed and please don't get out of the door at night in some of our culturally enhanced major cities at night without a car or a gun unless you like to be robbed and beaten.
We now fully understand successful immigration depends on type of immigrants.
No photo is gonna change that fact !
Good luck with opening the doors of utopia like our corrupt and so called people lovin' politicians did for us.
Our politicians live in nice villas far from that mess they created (as I do, lucky me :-)).
You have no idea what's gonna happen ... yet.

So now... the censorship begins.

Good work, Samuel.

I despair when otherwise decent people decide they must prevent others from expressing their views. But you won't understand this, because your kind has no shame.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2014 at 20:50 UTC
In reply to:

bobbarber: Ilegal immigration can only be solved by social justice. As long as there are pronounced inequalities between the developed nations and the rest of the world, people will find a way to move towards the money.

I lived in South America for a while, and people paid coyotes (human traffickers) $7,000 -15,000 (often not cash, but the family home, etc.) to smuggle them north across the U.S. border. The journey involved extreme hardship, possibilities of abuse, and even death in the desert. Obviously the migrants would have preferred to wait in line at the U.S. embassy, even for months, and buy a plane ticket, if there had even remotely been a possibility of legally emigrating.

Illegal gangs are a symptom of the larger problem, which is social inequality. The richer countries have become an enormous gated community. The idea is to keep as much money as possible inside the gates, and fence everybody else out. Obviously the people outside the gates disagree with that model.

Like I said somewhere else, this problem is almost entirely economic. A large amount of the money earned by illegal immigrants is sent home. And some actually do move back and forth, as job opportunities expand or contract in the USA.

If the solution is "to create a middle class in Mexico" than the solution may be impossible. We can't even maintain our own middle class here in the USA, as it shrinks while the rich get richer and the poor get even poorer. Creating a middle class in a foreign nation is a very ambitious task.

I think it is fair to say that I am a "legal citizen" of the USA, since my father immigrated here legally in 1923, and both my mother and myself were born here.

I have committed none of those crimes you speculate about.. My ancestors never got any amnesty from anyone. Quite the opposite, in fact. My ancestors were subjected to genocide themselves. Almost half their population was slaughtered by the Ottoman Turks for the crime of being Christians.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2014 at 15:50 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: Protect your borders, Europe, or you will end up like us - with huge underclass filling up inner cities making them unlivable, with terrible schools, crumbling infrastructure and high crime. Save your cities!

Anthony... here's why they build plants in China and not in Mexico.

Both nations offer cheap labor for sure, but only China offers a vast number of highly trained technicians that can be amassed on short notice.

Only China offers a very favorable business climate that encourages the exploitation of workers and the violation of all safety and health standards that might exist.

What Apple is doing in China is probably unethical, but it certainly isn't illegal. And it hasn't seemed to affect their sales one bit. People still line up at midnight to get the newest iPhone at full list price the day it is introduced.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2014 at 14:46 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: Protect your borders, Europe, or you will end up like us - with huge underclass filling up inner cities making them unlivable, with terrible schools, crumbling infrastructure and high crime. Save your cities!

Anthony, you are essentially right.

The problem is having a 2,000 mile hard to control border, with a nation having a much lower standard of living and almost no government benefits for the poor. So we become a magnet for people in desperate situations.

This problem boils down to simple economics, and it will get much worse if the economy here ever improves by very much. The truth is, when they find jobs, they stay here. When they don't, they often will go home. So any improvement in our economic conditions will only encourage more illegal immigration, not less.

This is certainly a very complicated problem, that will require some very creative solutions. There will be no easy answer.

I do feel that matching our immigration NEEDS with our immigration quotas would go a long way towards removing criminal behavior.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2014 at 14:08 UTC
In reply to:

bobbarber: Ilegal immigration can only be solved by social justice. As long as there are pronounced inequalities between the developed nations and the rest of the world, people will find a way to move towards the money.

I lived in South America for a while, and people paid coyotes (human traffickers) $7,000 -15,000 (often not cash, but the family home, etc.) to smuggle them north across the U.S. border. The journey involved extreme hardship, possibilities of abuse, and even death in the desert. Obviously the migrants would have preferred to wait in line at the U.S. embassy, even for months, and buy a plane ticket, if there had even remotely been a possibility of legally emigrating.

Illegal gangs are a symptom of the larger problem, which is social inequality. The richer countries have become an enormous gated community. The idea is to keep as much money as possible inside the gates, and fence everybody else out. Obviously the people outside the gates disagree with that model.

Bob, I didn't offer a solution. I just stated the problem. I actually agreed with you as to the cause being "social injustice," so if I am guilty of not offering realistic solutions, then we are both in that same situation.

We certainly cannot deport 16 million people. I think everyone agrees that that would be impractical. Some sort of accommodation must be made to avoid all that social unrest you speak of. The real question is... how do we address this problem moving forward. So we won't have to keep addressing the same problem every twenty years.

And I do have a solution for that one. Since it is pretty obvious that we need immigration, the solution is to adjust our immigration quotas to match our needs. Then process every immigrant properly, and lawfully. Criminals and other undesirables can be weeded out, while the remaining vast majority can join us as part of our multicultural nation.

Setting immigration quotas unrealistically low has created opportunities for criminals.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2014 at 14:02 UTC
In reply to:

bobbarber: Ilegal immigration can only be solved by social justice. As long as there are pronounced inequalities between the developed nations and the rest of the world, people will find a way to move towards the money.

I lived in South America for a while, and people paid coyotes (human traffickers) $7,000 -15,000 (often not cash, but the family home, etc.) to smuggle them north across the U.S. border. The journey involved extreme hardship, possibilities of abuse, and even death in the desert. Obviously the migrants would have preferred to wait in line at the U.S. embassy, even for months, and buy a plane ticket, if there had even remotely been a possibility of legally emigrating.

Illegal gangs are a symptom of the larger problem, which is social inequality. The richer countries have become an enormous gated community. The idea is to keep as much money as possible inside the gates, and fence everybody else out. Obviously the people outside the gates disagree with that model.

Bob, if we are a "gated community" then someone left the gate wide open.

We currently have a president who wants to give amnesty to over 16 million law breakers were were fortunate enough to be non citizens. Had they been citizens, they would have been prosecuted, but since they are non-citizens they will get a free pass.

Precisely how do we address "social inequity" which you and I both agree is the root cause? Do we throw the borders open... or do we provide all of Mexico with food stamps, welfare, and Medicaid... all provided by the U.S Taxpayers to keep them home in Mexico? I suppose we could move more of our jobs down there, but we have already tried that, and it doesn't seem to be working.

"People will always move towards the money" can also be a good rationale for robbing a bank, or mugging a tourist. Be careful what you wish for.

Direct link | Posted on May 25, 2014 at 13:28 UTC
On Samsung NX mini First Impressions Review preview (563 comments in total)
In reply to:

ennemkay: This will be the perfect telephoto companion to my wide angle 5n once Samsung releases a tele lens.

I don't get it.

I can see the size and weight advantage, but I don't see a telephoto advantage here. You can do telephoto with your NEX 5N. And, if you want the higher crop factor, why couldn't you just crop a photo from the Sony 5N?

It's pretty easy to turn an APSC sensor into a 1" sensor with either in-camera ("digital zoom") or post processing cropping. Why invest in another body and a whole new set of lenses?

Is there any real advantage to using a 1" sensor over using half of an APSC sensor? To me, they are pretty much the same thing.

I would prefer to stay with one system and use that money towards another NEX lens.

Direct link | Posted on May 23, 2014 at 20:04 UTC
On Site Update: notifications article (127 comments in total)

Very useful new features.

Thanks!

Direct link | Posted on May 21, 2014 at 23:45 UTC as 38th comment
On Walmart sues photographer's widow over family pictures article (200 comments in total)

Now here is the odd thing.... the last time I tried to scan some of my children's old school photos at Walmart to get prints made, Walmart refused to do it.

They told me the copyright belongs to the photographer who took the photos, and unless I could prove that I was the photographer they were legally bound to refuse printing them.

So now the Walton family has reversed themselves because they are the ones who want a photographer's images for free.

Amazing stuff.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2014 at 16:11 UTC as 48th comment | 1 reply
On Olympus PEN E-P5 Review preview (494 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Based on the new test results, the 0 shock feature seems to work, and work very well.

Nice job, Olympus! The EP5 goes back on the list as a dream camera for anyone who doesn't require a built in EVF.

I suppose they could take your camera back, upgrade the firmware, and return it to you. Problem fixed!

Of course I realize your camera is only 18 months old, so you will demand a fresh one. Or you could just switch to a nice Nikon D600.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 11:29 UTC

All these "I had no problem" folks probably don't understand... you will ONLY have a problem if it's your turn to check in with Adobe for subscription verification.

This means... one day outage means 1/30th of the subscribers are screwed. If it lasts a second day... then 1/15th are without service. If it lasts a third day then 1/10th.

So right now 29 out of 30 subscribers are baffled as to why the 1 out of 30 is complaining. They just don't understand why he can't log on.

Because they "have no problem" that means that guy must be lying.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 11:26 UTC as 30th comment | 4 replies

Another great "advantage" of the cloud subscription service!

This was one reason, many of us preferred stand alone software. Where are all those folks who said the cloud was a better deal?

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2014 at 23:48 UTC as 66th comment | 2 replies
On Olympus PEN E-P5 Review preview (494 comments in total)

Based on the new test results, the 0 shock feature seems to work, and work very well.

Nice job, Olympus! The EP5 goes back on the list as a dream camera for anyone who doesn't require a built in EVF.

Direct link | Posted on May 15, 2014 at 16:59 UTC as 28th comment | 3 replies
On Canon announces 16-35mm F4L and 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 lenses article (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

peevee1: They call 615g/115mm long lens "compact"?

For FF users... a 615 gram lens is downright tiny!

Everything is relative.

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 13:01 UTC
On Canon USA brings white EOS Rebel SL1 to America article (119 comments in total)

It seems like there is an inverse relationship between camera quality and color options. The best and most expensive cameras offer absolutely no color options. (Try ordering a Nikon D4s or Canon 1Dx in silver or white). The cheapest ones sometimes come in four or more different colors.

And there is nothing wrong with that. People always were willing to buy things because they liked the way it looked.

Pentax actually does a much better job at color options, and you see how well it worked for them.

They achieved a solid fourth place in a four way race.

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 09:25 UTC as 54th comment
On Samsung announces NX3000 mirrorless camera article (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: OK, now for the real question.

Why on earth would ANYONE pay more for this downgrade than the cost of a Samsung NX300?

Perhaps it might have "better WIFI" but in every other category it is inferior to the cheaper "old model."

* Fewer focus points (35 vs 247)
* Lower top shutter speed (1/4000 vs 1/6000)
* Smaller LCD screen (3.0" vs 3.3")
* Lower LCD resolution (460,000 vs 768,000 dots)
* Slower continuous drive rate (5fps vs 9fps)
* Tiny memory card, easy to lose (microSD vs. SD)
* No optional GPS available

I just don't see the purpose for this camera. If it appeals to you, then just buy an NX300 and get more camera for less money. The NX300 might even be better built, since it is supposed to be a mid level camera, and not an entry level one.

I will admit "better WIFI" is nice to have. But would you pay more for it if all the other features were downgraded?

@ mark petzold...

You are right. The Samsung NX3000 will eventually cost less than the NX300, which will justify the downgrade in features and abilities.

But right now, it costs more. So we are back to my question. Why would anyone pay more for less?

Incidentally, Sony did the exact same thing when they released the SLT A58. They created a stampede to buy up all the remaining stock of SLT A57 cameras, which were in many ways superior to the new model, but priced lower.

Direct link | Posted on May 9, 2014 at 12:51 UTC
On Samsung announces NX3000 mirrorless camera article (184 comments in total)

OK, now for the real question.

Why on earth would ANYONE pay more for this downgrade than the cost of a Samsung NX300?

Perhaps it might have "better WIFI" but in every other category it is inferior to the cheaper "old model."

* Fewer focus points (35 vs 247)
* Lower top shutter speed (1/4000 vs 1/6000)
* Smaller LCD screen (3.0" vs 3.3")
* Lower LCD resolution (460,000 vs 768,000 dots)
* Slower continuous drive rate (5fps vs 9fps)
* Tiny memory card, easy to lose (microSD vs. SD)
* No optional GPS available

I just don't see the purpose for this camera. If it appeals to you, then just buy an NX300 and get more camera for less money. The NX300 might even be better built, since it is supposed to be a mid level camera, and not an entry level one.

I will admit "better WIFI" is nice to have. But would you pay more for it if all the other features were downgraded?

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 18:20 UTC as 30th comment | 11 replies
On Samsung announces NX3000 mirrorless camera article (184 comments in total)
In reply to:

AngryCorgi: Congrats to Samsung. They just tied Canon for the most recycled APS-C sensor. This is their 11th camera with a variant of their 20MP sensor, Canon hit #11 with the EOS M2 carrying a variant of their 18MP sensor.

Futility is a popular trait amongst some companies, to the point they seem to be competing at it.

I hate to be a stickler for details... but I believe the "most recycled sensor" award belongs to Olympus/Panasonic.

The 12.3 MP Panasonic 4/3 sensor(2008-2012, RIP) appeared in 19 different cameras. Specifically, 15 MILC cameras and 4 DSLRs.

I believe you owe them an apology.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2014 at 18:02 UTC
In reply to:

Marvol: Maybe Sony can fix the unfortunate omission of GPS via a firmware upgrade*...

[*yes yes I know... Sony doesn't do firmware upgrades ;P]

I really don't understand why Sony has stripped this feature off a premium priced product.

The GPS on my four year old A55 works great, and I have grown to love this feature. Odds are, the GPS units made today would work even better.

This is a truly useful feature for people who take lots of photos and can't remember where they were when they took them. It makes geotagging as easy as pie on web hosting sites.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2014 at 15:36 UTC
On Leica T (Typ 701) First Impressions Review preview (2294 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: If a Chinese start-up introduced a camera with the same specifications, and yet another (unnecessary) proprietary lens mount, at even 1/10th the price of this Leica, they would be mercilessly mocked and ridiculed. The world doesn't need another proprietary lens mount. I will give JK Imaging the benefit of the doubt for the new "Kodak" Pixpro S-1, if only because it expands upon an existing non-proprietary lens mount. If Leica had followed in the footsteps of Panasonic with a M43 camera, I would applaud them, even with this silly "Made in Germany" sales gimmick.

Maybe it's time for Leica to stop producing any cameras and just concentrate on rebranding Panasonic cameras with (admittedly) improved firmware?

I simply cannot imagine any other maker getting away with selling a very basic camera without an EVF or a tilt screen for this price.

Only Leica can pull this off.

$2200 for a camera, plus $672 for an optional EVF. Add in another $2100 for the kit lens!

You just spent around $5,000, which is exactly twice the price of an OMD EM1 with a 12-40mm f/2.8 lens. But your LCD still doesn't tilt, and your Leica isn't weather sealed.

But... at least you got a nice red dot.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2014 at 20:22 UTC
Total: 659, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »