I don't think you are following along with this subject
What? Of course he is. *you* appear to be the one not following along.
It sounds like you think that there is a movement afoot to pass laws to ban people from repairing their own property.
There is. From TFS: "The Security Innovation Center, with backing of powerful tech industry groups, is arguing that letting consumers fix their own devices will empower hackers. "
A movement afoot to ban people form repairing their own property.
That is the opposite of what is happening here.
O really? From TFS: "The group released a survey last week warning of possible privacy and security risks should consumers have the right to repair their own devices."
Right there, "risks" should consumers have the right to repair"...
People are trying to get legislation passed to preserve the ability to repair products
Possibly, but nowhere in the summary does it say something like that. This is about what YOU say isn't happening.
The whole point is that corporations are trying to take away the ability of letting consumers decide.
The whole point of THIS article is that there IS a movement afoot to pass laws to ban people form repairing your own property, which directly contradicts your previous assertion.
From TFS: "asked whether Security Innovation Center was opposed to consumers having the right to repair devices they purchased and owned, Zecher said the group did oppose that right "
OKCupid asks people if they have cats or dogs. Then they let you look for someone that already owns a cat or a dog. They do NOT let you exclude people that have cats or dogs.
That is a one short term relationship system. If you only date people that already have a cat or a dog, you are looking for someone that won't have to change their life style to fit with yours. Perfect if all you want is a couple of months of fun.
Your words do not back up this assertion.
Why it it only perfect "if all you want is a couple of months of fun"? Aren't relationships built upon congruencies as well as fascinating differences?
A better question would be "why isn't he saying he didn't?"
Because the best thing you can do after being arrested is to shut the fuck up and not say anything else.
There is absolutely no upside to saying *anything* else at that point.
Besides, what would be the point of releasing a statement saying "I didn't do it."? Unlikely to sway the FBI and if you elaborate they may find something else to tag you with.
At least how it is practiced now. Think of it as exploits for the OS of your brain, because that is exactly what it has boiled down to.
They hook people up, read their responses to different stimuli, tweak and repeat until they have something which bypasses your internal firewalls. We are hardwired to respond to some things in particular ways, and that provides an exploit surface. Then we are firmware wired (social level) that provides another attack surface.
They have psychologists on staff for a reason, and it isn't to help you. It is one step down from using psychologists to devise torture, IMO, but in some ways worse because it is so pervasive and affects many more people.
Imagine of all advertising had to be Courier New in 12 point font, black, using the 1000 most common words in the English language.
I believe that N. Korea is going to be the cause of a nuclear war in the next five years. All the anger of the world is directed towards some happening and this will probably be it. Regards.
>>If you read the SF novels detailing life in Libertopia, you'll find that, as if by magic, citizens voluntarily donate enough of their income to feed, clothe, and house those that are poor through no fault of their own. They purchase, build, and staff a full parks system out of the goodness of their hearts.
>This is how things used to be done.
When? Please come up with a concrete time boxed example of a country doing this. I'm pretty sure that I could look at the details and come up with a more accurate story.
I thought we learned that the overall water content of the planet is steadily increasing due to gravitational attraction of the planet sucking in comets water deposits and the like. Sure in a few hundred years it's not much, and I don't imagine water mining the asteroids or capturing comets technologically.
You obviously aren't in their target business market.
No, they want CIO's, CTO's and CEO's thinking that they could have that much fun at "work" if only they had the kit. And yes, these people do have the mindset that matches the ad you portrayed so it appears to be actually well matched.
The interesting bit is the meta question implied by this - whether truths developed in a mathematical sense are valid in other contexts.
AN answer is something along the lines of this:
While a single equation cannot be created to fit every possible model it IS possible to develop an equation that fits properties of the model under study (at least to your own level of understanding of both maths and the problem domain).
The question whether mathematical insight can be used as an analogy machine to determine outcomes in other domains is the same question as to the breath of any particular philosophy, IMO.
To come back down to the question at hand Consider that the proposition under study is that differing eras of paradims are incommesurable.
Given the new meta framework we can then ask what would the underlying scientific model changes between physics, biology, and the social sciences be that would necessarily invalidate this proposition?
Since all of these models ultimately rest in mathematical descriptions of experimentation on created models, the question appears to me to be moot. That is, given the basis of these disiplines they cannot help fall into the same category. Even broadening their functions to the philosophical does not lead one out of this conclusion (if one accepts Maths as simply A particular rigorous philosophy).
Given that C++ is turing complete, any 'spell' that the "Great Enchantress" can create well, so can the C++ guru. There is not a single thing the enchantress can do with her compiled spell that the wizard cannot, and that's the fact, jack.
Fact is, the end result for the great Enchantress is exactly the same if they misuse their language constructs or implementation details.
You can argue that you don't like how you have to go about the syntax construction, but fair is fair, they are both equally powerful in EFFECT.
>The people making $17,000 a year are buying cheap, disposable items made by people making $5,000 a year.
So, turtles all the way down?
I think you fail to understand the point. Businesses cannot ONLY EXCLUSIVELY make money off of other businesses.
Now. Who is going to be able to by the high market items that Businesses require (because they charge each other so much)? Or if all businesses charge less, then wages also must decrease, and...
So, what is the equilibrium point of this type of equation? Where do you find employees who are consumers who can buy the required high market goods after this equilibrium is reached?
Prove that they can, using the market economics. I bet you can't. Don't forget the wealth hoarding and ability to leverage that wealth to extract tax form the market by the (really now people! ONE PERCENT??? wtf, it's at most like 100,000 PEOPLE, total in the world who have the $MONEY$. )
But this is nothing like advertising a sale and bait and switch.
To make your analogy correct would be this: I Advertise a "sale" - free service! People come and get free service. I Advertise a price increase. People either come and pay that price or they don't come. Those that come still expecting the old price are just SOL. Even normal retailers work that way - just try to use that 50% off thanksgiving coupon in August, dude.
Where is the bait and switch again? Every time you come to my site there is a new "sale" advertisement and you get that.
If I create a service even if it costs me absolutely zero to continue doing, am I obligated to continue to let you use it for free if I have done so before?
"They CAN, and it would remain legal in Germany, however, they were ordered not to."
Ordered not to...
Perhaps that means that they cannot? What does "ordered not to" mean to you other than the judge is saying they cannot enforce the ban in another country?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think you are following along with this subject
What? Of course he is. *you* appear to be the one not following along.
It sounds like you think that there is a movement afoot to pass laws to ban people from repairing their own property.
There is. From TFS: "The Security Innovation Center, with backing of powerful tech industry groups, is arguing that letting consumers fix their own devices will empower hackers. "
A movement afoot to ban people form repairing their own property.
That is the opposite of what is happening here.
O really? From TFS: "The group released a survey last week warning of possible privacy and security risks should consumers have the right to repair their own devices."
Right there, "risks" should consumers have the right to repair"...
People are trying to get legislation passed to preserve the ability to repair products
Possibly, but nowhere in the summary does it say something like that. This is about what YOU say isn't happening.
The whole point is that corporations are trying to take away the ability of letting consumers decide.
The whole point of THIS article is that there IS a movement afoot to pass laws to ban people form repairing your own property, which directly contradicts your previous assertion.
From TFS: "asked whether Security Innovation Center was opposed to consumers having the right to repair devices they purchased and owned, Zecher said the group did oppose that right "
Kind Regards.
This is about Ajit Pai.
If you don't think "corrupt" you're probably not thinking.
OKCupid asks people if they have cats or dogs. Then they let you look for someone that already owns a cat or a dog. They do NOT let you exclude people that have cats or dogs.
That is a one short term relationship system. If you only date people that already have a cat or a dog, you are looking for someone that won't have to change their life style to fit with yours. Perfect if all you want is a couple of months of fun.
Your words do not back up this assertion.
Why it it only perfect "if all you want is a couple of months of fun"? Aren't relationships built upon congruencies as well as fascinating differences?
Regards.
Who cares?
People are being asked to rate their own preference, if I read it right.
At worst, their feed becomes an echo chamber.
You are free to do the same.
How is asking your followers to follow you abuse?
I want pi to be 0 because pie is round.
Why do you not take your explanation to the obvious conclusion?
The guy willing to sell the drug at $1 a pill is just competition, which is also a capitalistic concept, yes?
Welcome to capitalism. The market is setting the rate.
Oh boy are you misguided.
You can certainly unintentionally confess to a crime. Never talk to the police except through your lawyer.
A better question would be "why isn't he saying he didn't?"
Because the best thing you can do after being arrested is to shut the fuck up and not say anything else.
There is absolutely no upside to saying *anything* else at that point.
Besides, what would be the point of releasing a statement saying "I didn't do it."? Unlikely to sway the FBI and if you elaborate they may find something else to tag you with.
At least how it is practiced now. Think of it as exploits for the OS of your brain, because that is exactly what it has boiled down to.
They hook people up, read their responses to different stimuli, tweak and repeat until they have something which bypasses your internal firewalls. We are hardwired to respond to some things in particular ways, and that provides an exploit surface. Then we are firmware wired (social level) that provides another attack surface.
They have psychologists on staff for a reason, and it isn't to help you. It is one step down from using psychologists to devise torture, IMO, but in some ways worse because it is so pervasive and affects many more people.
Imagine of all advertising had to be Courier New in 12 point font, black, using the 1000 most common words in the English language.
Are you a human being or a computer?
As you said: "Pick a style, pick a system, and STICK WITH IT."
Regards
I believe that N. Korea is going to be the cause of a nuclear war in the next five years.
All the anger of the world is directed towards some happening and this will probably be it.
Regards.
>>If you read the SF novels detailing life in Libertopia, you'll find that, as if by magic, citizens voluntarily donate enough of their income to feed, clothe, and house those that are poor through no fault of their own. They purchase, build, and staff a full parks system out of the goodness of their hearts.
>This is how things used to be done.
When? Please come up with a concrete time boxed example of a country doing this. I'm pretty sure that I could look at the details and come up with a more accurate story.
I thought we learned that the overall water content of the planet is steadily increasing due to gravitational attraction of the planet sucking in comets water deposits and the like. Sure in a few hundred years it's not much, and I don't imagine water mining the asteroids or capturing comets technologically.
You obviously aren't in their target business market.
No, they want CIO's, CTO's and CEO's thinking that they could have that much fun at "work" if only they had the kit.
And yes, these people do have the mindset that matches the ad you portrayed so it appears to be actually well matched.
So if a placebo cures *your* cancer you should try to get it to come out of remission?!?
That is essentially what you are advocating.
A sample size of one is all that is needed if it works for that one person, especially of the desired result is something like "happiness".
YMMV
YOUR milage may vary...
There is a difference between trade secrets and general know how.
I agree that if an employee is divulging trade secrets and they had a contractual obligation not to that is one thing.
Being able to create a business similar to the one they came from is not in any way remarkable or wrong.
> It's quite another if recruiters from Palm are actively poaching their competitors' employees.
And this is what is wrong with your outlook as well as the outlook of most corporations.
You seem to feel that these companies own their employees, keeping them on their "employee farms" and only their King can kill them.
Kind of like cattle.
Now, please let me know what is wrong with receiving an offer of employment at another firm for a better salary?
Regards.
The interesting bit is the meta question implied by this - whether truths developed in a mathematical sense are valid in other contexts.
AN answer is something along the lines of this:
While a single equation cannot be created to fit every possible model it IS possible to develop an equation that fits properties of the model under study (at least to your own level of understanding of both maths and the problem domain).
The question whether mathematical insight can be used as an analogy machine to determine outcomes in other domains is the same question as to the breath of any particular philosophy, IMO.
To come back down to the question at hand Consider that the proposition under study is that differing eras of paradims are incommesurable.
Given the new meta framework we can then ask what would the underlying scientific model changes between physics, biology, and the social sciences be that would necessarily invalidate this proposition?
Since all of these models ultimately rest in mathematical descriptions of experimentation on created models, the question appears to me to be moot. That is, given the basis of these disiplines they cannot help fall into the same category. Even broadening their functions to the philosophical does not lead one out of this conclusion (if one accepts Maths as simply A particular rigorous philosophy).
Regards /.!
Privatize the profits in any way possible... even retroactively.
Externalize the costs in any way possible.. hell, that's just business.
not that they are unwritten. There were detailed instructions on this topic.
The problem is that the instructions were deleted before being implemented.
A koan for a new age.
Your reply us unfortunately wrong, however.
Given that C++ is turing complete, any 'spell' that the "Great Enchantress" can create well, so can the C++ guru. There is not a single thing the enchantress can do with her compiled spell that the wizard cannot, and that's the fact, jack.
Fact is, the end result for the great Enchantress is exactly the same if they misuse their language constructs or implementation details.
You can argue that you don't like how you have to go about the syntax construction, but fair is fair, they are both equally powerful in EFFECT.
>The people making $17,000 a year are buying cheap, disposable items made by people making $5,000 a year.
So, turtles all the way down?
I think you fail to understand the point. Businesses cannot ONLY EXCLUSIVELY make money off of other businesses.
Now. Who is going to be able to by the high market items that Businesses require (because they charge each other so much)? Or if all businesses charge less, then wages also must decrease, and...
So, what is the equilibrium point of this type of equation? Where do you find employees who are consumers who can buy the required high market goods after this equilibrium is reached?
Prove that they can, using the market economics. I bet you can't. Don't forget the wealth hoarding and ability to leverage that wealth to extract tax form the market by the (really now people! ONE PERCENT??? wtf, it's at most like 100,000 PEOPLE, total in the world who have the $MONEY$. )
Regards.
Free Advertising.
So, spend some serious marketing $$ going to all these forums and letting other businesses know what you exactly have to offer.
Counter their points politely and suggest that other business owners check you out themselves and make up their own mind.
This is only a bad thing if you turn it into one.
But this is nothing like advertising a sale and bait and switch.
To make your analogy correct would be this:
I Advertise a "sale" - free service!
People come and get free service.
I Advertise a price increase.
People either come and pay that price or they don't come.
Those that come still expecting the old price are just SOL.
Even normal retailers work that way - just try to use that 50% off thanksgiving coupon in August, dude.
Where is the bait and switch again? Every time you come to my site there is a new "sale" advertisement and you get that.
If I create a service even if it costs me absolutely zero to continue doing, am I obligated to continue to let you use it for free if I have done so before?
Nope.
I am STILL confused by your statements!
"They CAN, and it would remain legal in Germany, however, they were ordered not to."
Ordered not to...
Perhaps that means that they cannot? What does "ordered not to" mean to you other than the judge is saying they cannot enforce the ban in another country?