It's a testament to the state of our political discourse that we think of those terms in an either/or manner. There's a reason those two words have the same root, and were both used long before Karl Marx took pen to paper.
The maxim "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" is precisely what's going on when you're helping your neighbor move out without charging him a fee or putting a similar condition on your act. Up until comparatively recently, market behavior was understood to be the precise opposite of "community," and was not welcome in it.
Ah, the ProCD case. That was featured prominently in my first year Contract Law course - of course, the professor (a rather free-market conservative type) neglected to mention that such a view is actually in the minority when looking at Federal Circuit and District decisions on the matter (and the Supreme Court has yet to take such a case up).
So really, be careful which state you happen to be in when you open that shrink-wrapped game.;)
No, capitalism needs people to be jerks (or at least be jerks for a good portion of the day). It's pretty obvious given the anti-social characteristics that it rewards.
If you look at something like a gift economy, the way you gain status (or at least keep up with the Joneses) is through giving away as much to others as possible. Marcel Mauss is a good starting point for anyone interested (as is David Graeber).
The imposition of markets is at the very root of so many of the ills facing impoverished countries. I can't help but see the same tortured reasoning that I see in Homer Simpson's classic explanation that beer is "the cause of -- and solution to -- all of life's problems."
Thankfully, Chris Dodd (D-Jowls) will be leading a filibuster in the Senate. Let's hope other Senators join and support him (call your congresscritters!).
It is quite a hack indeed. Microsoft's Virtual Desktop Manager relies on bundling groups of windows that are minimized and expanded simultaneously (along with a different desktop background for each bundle). Not only do most programmers not anticipate this (and due to the hacky nature of the implementation it can cause major headaches for end users), apparently MS programmers don't either, as even IE acts ridiculously with it. You also can't move a window in one "desktop" to another.
I'm happy XP finally brought real multiple-display support (something the Mac has had since System 7 at the latest), but who knows when robust multiple-virtual-display support will come along.
God, the Soul Calibur storyline (at least in SC II) was so perfunctory. And the announcer at the beginning sounds like a sophomore english major waxing profound:
"A hero desires a sword, and a sword desires truth..."
I mean really, what the hell does that even mean, and how is that helping gameplay??
Anyone else rather skeptical of the origins of the article?
1. Google News isn't showing anything else on this (aside from this very/. post!) 2. The claims it is making about the vaccine are astounding and are, unless you have a paid subscription to the single medical journal article referenced, unverifiable. Neither are there any quotes attributed to anyone. 3. The site in question is not even a hard news site; it appears to however be chock full of dressed up press releases by non-profits.
As promising as this "article" may read, there's no evidence that we should take these claims seriously.
The principles, if one must cast a political/economic philosophy over them, would most closely resemble anarchism. Representative democracy and the modern business both have leaders and led, the rule-makers and the rule-followers: a disturbing amount of our economy and polity is top-down (also never meaningfully accountable) and couldn't be further from swarm theory. If we want to see a more rhizomic society, we'll have to think a lot further outside the box, that's for sure.
The closest the article's author comes to political applications is the Seattle '99 protests. However such tactics and structural sentiments abound in anti-neoliberal movements, from the Landless Workers Movement in Brazil to the Zapatistas in southern Mexico.
In the end, isn't democracy little more than a means to the end of finding out what the best path to take is? Nope. Democracy has almost never been simply about the end results. We are social creatures, and as a result, the kind of path taken to reach a decision/conclusion is almost as important as where the path leads. Participation in decisions that affect your life (be they nearby, like communities and workplaces, or more remote, like national politics) brings to the table a whole slew of psychological and societal benefits. Empowerment, critical analysis, social bonding: these are all positive "side-effects" of the democratic processes.
Sadly, no! The most that will happen, save it reaching the Supreme Court, is that the decision will apply to the users/companies in the 3rd Circuit court's jurisdiction alone.
A majority of Federal courts have ruled that shrinkwrap licenses are in general unenforceable, though a minority have affirmed that it is indeed a legally-binding document.
However, we're dealing with what's called a "clickwrap" license, which hasn't nearly the legal history that shrinkwrap licenses have. This decision, if upheld (I guarantee it's going to be appealed), is certainly an important early move in the right direction.
Bear in mind, Republicans supported freeing the slaves, pushed desegregation, formed the ACLU, allowed women to vote; In that case, I have some people you need to remind.
For someone who exhorts research on others, it's kind of strange reading you write "Republicans are called Republicans - because they support the Republic form of government, and Democrats support 'democracy'". No mention of the Dixiecrat split, or the historical roots of the Democratic-Republican Party.
When people say the word "democracy," they're generally speaking about a set of values more than a specific structural process. So many people like to trot out the "we're not a democracy, we're a republic" and sound politically astute, but honestly, it adds nothing valuable to the discussion.
PURE CONJECTURE: Well the actual name of the game, "Sim City Societies," makes me think it will be less micro-managing a city, and more macro-managing a region, or a small country. That way you'd be able to fool around with bigger picture fiscal policies, trade, laws, environmental issues, etc.
They could also make this a mostly online multiplayer game, too, where various cities/regions can reach agreements as to barriers to trade, connecting highways & rail, etc.
We shall see... we shall see at E3.
It's very likely that they'll insist on the straight-up Attribution only license. From wikipedia:
"Attribution (by): Permit others to copy, distribute, display and perform the work and make derivative works based upon it only if they give the author or licensor the credits in the manner specified by these."
None of the other add-ons would make it conducive for other news channels to re-broadcast the video, because the ads sold during the broadcast would most likely violate any non-commercial restriction. There might be a "No Derivatives" tacked on ("Permit others to copy, distribute, display and perform only verbatim copies of the work, not derivative works based upon it."), which would prevent "remixing", but also might prevent people from showing mere clips arranged in non-sequential order. This is all kind of vague; I don't think a CC license has worked its way through the courts yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Kermit Roosevelt would dispute your CIA claim - as he was the agent who personally managed the overthrow.
As for loving "his people," the Shah had a funny way of showing it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAVAK
I sure hope not. They'd have an unfair advantage in Business Administration, where the best that most can do is simply act like 11-year-olds.
It's a testament to the state of our political discourse that we think of those terms in an either/or manner. There's a reason those two words have the same root, and were both used long before Karl Marx took pen to paper.
The maxim "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" is precisely what's going on when you're helping your neighbor move out without charging him a fee or putting a similar condition on your act. Up until comparatively recently, market behavior was understood to be the precise opposite of "community," and was not welcome in it.
Clearly you were eating an aborigine that was out of season. Try again in a 3-4 months, or place one in a paper bag on the counter for a week or so.
Ah, the ProCD case. That was featured prominently in my first year Contract Law course - of course, the professor (a rather free-market conservative type) neglected to mention that such a view is actually in the minority when looking at Federal Circuit and District decisions on the matter (and the Supreme Court has yet to take such a case up).
;)
So really, be careful which state you happen to be in when you open that shrink-wrapped game.
What makes you think that the GOP will nominate a whi-- *looks at the GOP field*
Damn. Fair enough.
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
No, capitalism needs people to be jerks (or at least be jerks for a good portion of the day). It's pretty obvious given the anti-social characteristics that it rewards.
If you look at something like a gift economy, the way you gain status (or at least keep up with the Joneses) is through giving away as much to others as possible. Marcel Mauss is a good starting point for anyone interested (as is David Graeber).
The imposition of markets is at the very root of so many of the ills facing impoverished countries. I can't help but see the same tortured reasoning that I see in Homer Simpson's classic explanation that beer is "the cause of -- and solution to -- all of life's problems."
Thankfully, Chris Dodd (D-Jowls) will be leading a filibuster in the Senate. Let's hope other Senators join and support him (call your congresscritters!).
Here's a good outline of what will be going down.
It is quite a hack indeed. Microsoft's Virtual Desktop Manager relies on bundling groups of windows that are minimized and expanded simultaneously (along with a different desktop background for each bundle). Not only do most programmers not anticipate this (and due to the hacky nature of the implementation it can cause major headaches for end users), apparently MS programmers don't either, as even IE acts ridiculously with it. You also can't move a window in one "desktop" to another.
I'm happy XP finally brought real multiple-display support (something the Mac has had since System 7 at the latest), but who knows when robust multiple-virtual-display support will come along.
Or we could militarize it, and only show the words to our national enemies!
Wait... where have I heard of that idea before...?
God, the Soul Calibur storyline (at least in SC II) was so perfunctory. And the announcer at the beginning sounds like a sophomore english major waxing profound:
"A hero desires a sword, and a sword desires truth..."
I mean really, what the hell does that even mean, and how is that helping gameplay??
Anyone else rather skeptical of the origins of the article?
/. post!)
1. Google News isn't showing anything else on this (aside from this very
2. The claims it is making about the vaccine are astounding and are, unless you have a paid subscription to the single medical journal article referenced, unverifiable. Neither are there any quotes attributed to anyone.
3. The site in question is not even a hard news site; it appears to however be chock full of dressed up press releases by non-profits.
As promising as this "article" may read, there's no evidence that we should take these claims seriously.
The principles, if one must cast a political/economic philosophy over them, would most closely resemble anarchism. Representative democracy and the modern business both have leaders and led, the rule-makers and the rule-followers: a disturbing amount of our economy and polity is top-down (also never meaningfully accountable) and couldn't be further from swarm theory. If we want to see a more rhizomic society, we'll have to think a lot further outside the box, that's for sure.
The closest the article's author comes to political applications is the Seattle '99 protests. However such tactics and structural sentiments abound in anti-neoliberal movements, from the Landless Workers Movement in Brazil to the Zapatistas in southern Mexico.
Alas, I was also a victim of the evil communist menace that is... SOCIALIZED GAMING. *insert scary 1950s music here*
Sadly, no! The most that will happen, save it reaching the Supreme Court, is that the decision will apply to the users/companies in the 3rd Circuit court's jurisdiction alone.
A majority of Federal courts have ruled that shrinkwrap licenses are in general unenforceable, though a minority have affirmed that it is indeed a legally-binding document.
However, we're dealing with what's called a "clickwrap" license, which hasn't nearly the legal history that shrinkwrap licenses have. This decision, if upheld (I guarantee it's going to be appealed), is certainly an important early move in the right direction.
For someone who exhorts research on others, it's kind of strange reading you write "Republicans are called Republicans - because they support the Republic form of government, and Democrats support 'democracy'". No mention of the Dixiecrat split, or the historical roots of the Democratic-Republican Party.
When people say the word "democracy," they're generally speaking about a set of values more than a specific structural process. So many people like to trot out the "we're not a democracy, we're a republic" and sound politically astute, but honestly, it adds nothing valuable to the discussion.
PURE CONJECTURE: Well the actual name of the game, "Sim City Societies," makes me think it will be less micro-managing a city, and more macro-managing a region, or a small country. That way you'd be able to fool around with bigger picture fiscal policies, trade, laws, environmental issues, etc.
They could also make this a mostly online multiplayer game, too, where various cities/regions can reach agreements as to barriers to trade, connecting highways & rail, etc. We shall see... we shall see at E3.
Yes, the world's money supply doubles -- because half of the world's population is behind bars... ;)
It's very likely that they'll insist on the straight-up Attribution only license. From wikipedia:
"Attribution (by): Permit others to copy, distribute, display and perform the work and make derivative works based upon it only if they give the author or licensor the credits in the manner specified by these."
None of the other add-ons would make it conducive for other news channels to re-broadcast the video, because the ads sold during the broadcast would most likely violate any non-commercial restriction. There might be a "No Derivatives" tacked on ("Permit others to copy, distribute, display and perform only verbatim copies of the work, not derivative works based upon it."), which would prevent "remixing", but also might prevent people from showing mere clips arranged in non-sequential order. This is all kind of vague; I don't think a CC license has worked its way through the courts yet.
That'll be tough to explain to an IP lawyer... IP Lawyer: "Wait... aren't you yourself *proof* of prior art?"
George: "Uh, Mr. President, sir. People are becoming a bit... confused by the way your and your opponent are, well, constantly holding hands."
Kang: "We are merely exchanging long protein strings. If you can think of a simpler way, I'd like to hear it!"