Sorry not ridiculous at all. The GP's point was if its law it must be done and yahoo is using that as its defense. Well what if in the future China makes some laws which either directly or indirectly kill people (oh wait they have some of those already). The company can either A) say well it's the law nothing we can do or B) say we value life over money and walk away. Since Yahoo has said money > anything else then any far out there analogy is fair game.
At that point the entire company (not just say the Chinese division) makes the call as how far it will sink to make the almighty buck.
So what if there was a law saying that a company working in China must have its Board of Directors each rape a child every year. That would be ok right because they are complying with the laws of that country?
Excise Tax
Let's also not forget NC charges and excise tax on your cary every year. So you aren't just taxed once for your car purchase but assuming your car lives 15 years...the state taxes you 15 times!!! That excise tax is NOT your yearly registration fee either.
NC just needs to make a law saying all the money you earn goes right to them be a lot easier.
"It emerged over the weekend that Google Inc. (GOOG) had complained to both state and federal officials that Microsoft's new Windows Vista operating software was disadvantaging rivals"
How was it "disadvantaging rivals"? Doesn't say in the article what the actual issue is (unless I completely missed it but I did RTFA a few times). So are they saying because Vista comes with a search program bundled that its not fair or are they saying all the APIs are hidden or are they saying we want the lowest level kernel access possible?
To me this is just MS and Google going to mom and dad screaming they aren't playing fair.
Awesome site!! Ultima 1 - 5? SUPER SWEET. Thanks for the crack buddy... when I am in the back alley doing things that would shame Paris Hilton to pay for my internet connection I know who to blame! Thanks!:-)
I've thought about the whole whose standards do you apply and have come up with a decent answer (in my mind at least). The morals we should apply are ones that gives human beings freedom and the ability to live their lives how they want too (without causing harms to others).
In more detail any set of morals that punish someone for just how they where born (race, sex, caste, etc) which a person has no control over has no business being called morals. Yay you are born a girl, they don't like girls, you die. Ya screw that. Sorry we don't like you black folk, how dare you "choose" to be born of a bad skin color. Seriously no contest. Your parents are poor too bad no matter how rich you are you will always be considered the lowest caste in our system. Only useful if you want to keep people down.
A set of morals that dictate who someone can/must marry is gone too since that set removes the ability of the person to be free.
Can't make fun of a kind/ruler/etc? We don't want to apply those.
The idea of what morals to choose would be how the benefit people not harm them. I cherry picked the easy ones for sure, there might be more difficult ones that take more time to iron out.
If a company chooses to work in multiple countries and has to deal with legal/moral issues conflicts the right answer would be to pick the morals that benefit the freedom of people. Oh no Yahoo leaves china some people lose their jobs least they didn't get someone put in jail (or worse for life).
I see posts asking if it is legal or not but does this matter? If country A passes a law that by moral standards is so disgusting can't people be held accountable if they still obey the law? If the law saws genocide against a people is legal and people do it, shouldn't those people still be held accountable? So if what happened in China is legal but makes the free world barf in disgust shouldn't the human morale side overrule the legal one?
Just some food for thought to hurt our brains on a Monday.
My laptop has traveled out of the country many times, my only computer, cats seem to think it's a warming blanket, etc. Still fine. Friend of mine returned his MacBook Pro few months after he had it due to hard issues.
So from my post Macs are crap, so if you don't want a sturdy laptop but a piece of crap laptop buy a mac.
Or maybe electronics are hit or miss because they are well electronics. Some people have good results others bad and this surely isn't 100% hardcore proof something is better than another thing right? Nah that couldn't be it at all...right?
But it's still a factor for people (unless you are talking about someone brand new entering the computer market which would be interesting to see numbers on that alone, or you are rich) people will have stuff.
That stuff which would have to be replaced adds to the cost of the switch and can not and should not be ignored. Mind you this issues PC vs. macs is the same as XP vs. Vista, as Linux Ditribution #1 vs. #2, etc.
You MUST factor accessories. Since it's a lot of the accessories which makes the computer valuable in the first place (printing, financial software, etc). Assuming you aren't rich, would you buy a house in which you had to throw out all your old furniture?
But when these specific cost arguments come up and people say just buy X it only costs Y always ignore the cost of the stuff which must be replaced. Yes you can try to plan ahead to make sure when you buy hardware it will support different operating systems, however too bad software doesn't come with multiple OS flavors in one package.
I have a 5 year old Gateway M350 notebook still works 100% perfectly. I have another laptop 4 years ol IBM thinkpad no issues. My friend had an apple iMac brand new returned in a month due to hardware failure.
Lesson some electronics last long times, others don't.
.
People forget about the accessories. If I have scanners/printers/software that only works with a PC and not on OS X then I will need to buy the replacements. This adds to the cost. I have a scanner and laser printer that do not work under OS X (yes I have done my research) so that alone would make switching a lot more (and no they aren't cheap scanners or printers).
But yet in any PC vs Mac price wars no one mentions this.
Actually number of MMOs I have played is ZERO. And what difference does it make if its an MMO, single player, whatever. Video games are luxury entertainment, they do not do anything but entertain. If you are paying for entertainment which no longer entertains you then you need to take a step back and say why am I wasting my time and oney on this?
If you don't like this MMO, go to another one or look for anew hobby. The amount of time people waste on this is beyond me.
Seriously how screwed up can you be if you take a game this seriously. This isn't life or death, this is luxury entertainment. You pay X per month and if you aren't happy you go elsewhere. It is no different then if you play a sort, take dance lessons, martial arts whatever.
So these 9 people will have oversight? So they can see all source code, all chat logs, all everything anytime? Will the company pay for them to go there? Unless they are rich the avg. person will not be able to do this.
Seriously though put the computer in a public place, watch your kids when they are on it, don't allow them to use it when you aren't home, etc., etc. Paying for a yearly service for the program to baby-sit kids is not a good idea IMHO. Once they grow up and are teenagers then a parent has a lot more to worry about then if they see porn.
"And keeping those pornographers and sexual predators away will cost you a mere $70 a year...'
Well you don't think they would care about and/or protect our children for free right? I mean it may be think about the children...but the end of that quote is...only when cash is involved.
At the mall the other day saw 8 year olds with cell phones. My fiancé says what does an 8 year old need a cell phone for? I agree with you. Not sure why a teenager needs so much disposable cash. That's not going to cause problems for society when they become adults...ya right.
Another theory is the purchasing power of teenage gets is greater then adults. This can be for many reasons (less bills, higher allowance, whatever) but overall teenagers have tons of disposable cash on hand. Also teenagers are a billion times more likely to follow fads to be cool then adults. So if band A is hot, doesn't matter if they don't like band A because they better pretend to be cool.
And being the free market the point of a company is to maximize shareholders profits and not too bring the next great artist to the spotlight. Sometimes being the minority in market (aka your taste vs the rest of the population) leaves you only the selection of fried burgers when you really want a great steak. It sucks.
But unless every adult in the world is going to start blowing all their money on stuff the teenage demographic will reign supreme!
I guess it boils down to: prestige due to your actions (cure cancer, charity work, take a one man business globally in a few years) vs. prestige because you have money to buy stuff.
Look at the google guys. From nothing to billionaires, may years hard work, etc. Versus say....Paris Hilton. Both have money....though the mean sin which they got it I think would dictate their prestige, respect, whatever.
But in regards to the GP though, in my opinion, apple products don't have prestige. They don't give you prestige. But hey whatever works for other people
Nice. In that case though it's the money which gives the prestige not the actual item. If someone created the worlds largest turn and covered it in diamonds and it sold for $50 million what would be the prestige factor: the fact you have 50 million dollars you can spend on the turn covered in diamonds or that you have a turd covered in diamonds (might be a close call). Lol.
A $500 generic consumer tech toy however isn't going to earn you must prestige.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry not ridiculous at all. The GP's point was if its law it must be done and yahoo is using that as its defense. Well what if in the future China makes some laws which either directly or indirectly kill people (oh wait they have some of those already). The company can either A) say well it's the law nothing we can do or B) say we value life over money and walk away. Since Yahoo has said money > anything else then any far out there analogy is fair game.
At that point the entire company (not just say the Chinese division) makes the call as how far it will sink to make the almighty buck.
So what if there was a law saying that a company working in China must have its Board of Directors each rape a child every year. That would be ok right because they are complying with the laws of that country?
Excise Tax Let's also not forget NC charges and excise tax on your cary every year. So you aren't just taxed once for your car purchase but assuming your car lives 15 years...the state taxes you 15 times!!! That excise tax is NOT your yearly registration fee either.
NC just needs to make a law saying all the money you earn goes right to them be a lot easier.
"Does a +10 charisma for small children give you an extra six trillion credits?"
:-)
Not sure for others, but my +10 charisma for small children got me 10 years AND I have to register as a sex offender where ever I go.
"It emerged over the weekend that Google Inc. (GOOG) had complained to both state and federal officials that Microsoft's new Windows Vista operating software was disadvantaging rivals"
How was it "disadvantaging rivals"? Doesn't say in the article what the actual issue is (unless I completely missed it but I did RTFA a few times). So are they saying because Vista comes with a search program bundled that its not fair or are they saying all the APIs are hidden or are they saying we want the lowest level kernel access possible?
To me this is just MS and Google going to mom and dad screaming they aren't playing fair.
Awesome site!! Ultima 1 - 5? SUPER SWEET. Thanks for the crack buddy... when I am in the back alley doing things that would shame Paris Hilton to pay for my internet connection I know who to blame! Thanks! :-)
Anyone know of a link to an online version? Sure I should be working but I want to shot small furry animals!
I've thought about the whole whose standards do you apply and have come up with a decent answer (in my mind at least). The morals we should apply are ones that gives human beings freedom and the ability to live their lives how they want too (without causing harms to others).
In more detail any set of morals that punish someone for just how they where born (race, sex, caste, etc) which a person has no control over has no business being called morals. Yay you are born a girl, they don't like girls, you die. Ya screw that. Sorry we don't like you black folk, how dare you "choose" to be born of a bad skin color. Seriously no contest. Your parents are poor too bad no matter how rich you are you will always be considered the lowest caste in our system. Only useful if you want to keep people down.
A set of morals that dictate who someone can/must marry is gone too since that set removes the ability of the person to be free.
Can't make fun of a kind/ruler/etc? We don't want to apply those.
The idea of what morals to choose would be how the benefit people not harm them. I cherry picked the easy ones for sure, there might be more difficult ones that take more time to iron out.
If a company chooses to work in multiple countries and has to deal with legal/moral issues conflicts the right answer would be to pick the morals that benefit the freedom of people. Oh no Yahoo leaves china some people lose their jobs least they didn't get someone put in jail (or worse for life).
My 2 cents...
Plan B involves giving all Chinese people amnesty and making them US citizens....
I see posts asking if it is legal or not but does this matter? If country A passes a law that by moral standards is so disgusting can't people be held accountable if they still obey the law? If the law saws genocide against a people is legal and people do it, shouldn't those people still be held accountable? So if what happened in China is legal but makes the free world barf in disgust shouldn't the human morale side overrule the legal one?
Just some food for thought to hurt our brains on a Monday.
My laptop has traveled out of the country many times, my only computer, cats seem to think it's a warming blanket, etc. Still fine. Friend of mine returned his MacBook Pro few months after he had it due to hard issues.
So from my post Macs are crap, so if you don't want a sturdy laptop but a piece of crap laptop buy a mac.
Or maybe electronics are hit or miss because they are well electronics. Some people have good results others bad and this surely isn't 100% hardcore proof something is better than another thing right? Nah that couldn't be it at all...right?
But it's still a factor for people (unless you are talking about someone brand new entering the computer market which would be interesting to see numbers on that alone, or you are rich) people will have stuff.
That stuff which would have to be replaced adds to the cost of the switch and can not and should not be ignored. Mind you this issues PC vs. macs is the same as XP vs. Vista, as Linux Ditribution #1 vs. #2, etc.
You MUST factor accessories. Since it's a lot of the accessories which makes the computer valuable in the first place (printing, financial software, etc). Assuming you aren't rich, would you buy a house in which you had to throw out all your old furniture?
But when these specific cost arguments come up and people say just buy X it only costs Y always ignore the cost of the stuff which must be replaced. Yes you can try to plan ahead to make sure when you buy hardware it will support different operating systems, however too bad software doesn't come with multiple OS flavors in one package.
I have a 5 year old Gateway M350 notebook still works 100% perfectly. I have another laptop 4 years ol IBM thinkpad no issues. My friend had an apple iMac brand new returned in a month due to hardware failure.
Lesson some electronics last long times, others don't. .
People forget about the accessories. If I have scanners/printers/software that only works with a PC and not on OS X then I will need to buy the replacements. This adds to the cost. I have a scanner and laser printer that do not work under OS X (yes I have done my research) so that alone would make switching a lot more (and no they aren't cheap scanners or printers).
But yet in any PC vs Mac price wars no one mentions this.
Actually number of MMOs I have played is ZERO. And what difference does it make if its an MMO, single player, whatever. Video games are luxury entertainment, they do not do anything but entertain. If you are paying for entertainment which no longer entertains you then you need to take a step back and say why am I wasting my time and oney on this?
If you don't like this MMO, go to another one or look for anew hobby. The amount of time people waste on this is beyond me.
Seriously how screwed up can you be if you take a game this seriously. This isn't life or death, this is luxury entertainment. You pay X per month and if you aren't happy you go elsewhere. It is no different then if you play a sort, take dance lessons, martial arts whatever.
So these 9 people will have oversight? So they can see all source code, all chat logs, all everything anytime? Will the company pay for them to go there? Unless they are rich the avg. person will not be able to do this.
May I suggest a good game of chess?
The parents! Oh wait that was way too easy. :-)
Seriously though put the computer in a public place, watch your kids when they are on it, don't allow them to use it when you aren't home, etc., etc. Paying for a yearly service for the program to baby-sit kids is not a good idea IMHO. Once they grow up and are teenagers then a parent has a lot more to worry about then if they see porn.
"And keeping those pornographers and sexual predators away will cost you a mere $70 a year...'
Well you don't think they would care about and/or protect our children for free right? I mean it may be think about the children...but the end of that quote is...only when cash is involved.
no other companies will work with AT&T since they are evil and who would want to be associated with an evil company...oh wait...
:-) It's a joke....relax...
"Illegal filesharing killed Chuck Norris."
Chuck Norris is out back and would like to "talk" to you about your statement that ANYTHING can kill him. Dude he looks pissed.
At the mall the other day saw 8 year olds with cell phones. My fiancé says what does an 8 year old need a cell phone for? I agree with you. Not sure why a teenager needs so much disposable cash. That's not going to cause problems for society when they become adults...ya right.
But getting caught doing something illegal (whether you think it is right or wrong) can still screw your life up.
Another theory is the purchasing power of teenage gets is greater then adults. This can be for many reasons (less bills, higher allowance, whatever) but overall teenagers have tons of disposable cash on hand. Also teenagers are a billion times more likely to follow fads to be cool then adults. So if band A is hot, doesn't matter if they don't like band A because they better pretend to be cool.
And being the free market the point of a company is to maximize shareholders profits and not too bring the next great artist to the spotlight. Sometimes being the minority in market (aka your taste vs the rest of the population) leaves you only the selection of fried burgers when you really want a great steak. It sucks.
But unless every adult in the world is going to start blowing all their money on stuff the teenage demographic will reign supreme!
I guess it boils down to: prestige due to your actions (cure cancer, charity work, take a one man business globally in a few years) vs. prestige because you have money to buy stuff.
....Paris Hilton. Both have money....though the mean sin which they got it I think would dictate their prestige, respect, whatever.
Look at the google guys. From nothing to billionaires, may years hard work, etc. Versus say
But in regards to the GP though, in my opinion, apple products don't have prestige. They don't give you prestige. But hey whatever works for other people
Nice. In that case though it's the money which gives the prestige not the actual item. If someone created the worlds largest turn and covered it in diamonds and it sold for $50 million what would be the prestige factor: the fact you have 50 million dollars you can spend on the turn covered in diamonds or that you have a turd covered in diamonds (might be a close call). Lol.
A $500 generic consumer tech toy however isn't going to earn you must prestige.