I have never actually watched the movie (I missed it when it first came out because I have never been much of a movie person). Many of my friends told me how bad it was, so I did not spend money to watch it but when the opportunity came to watch it for free, I started to watch it. That only lasted about five minutes when I realized they had completely missed David Brin's point. The theme of the movie was not even one of the themes of the book.
The point of the book was about the powers of shared myths (whether true or not didn't matter, as long as everyone bought into the myth) for building a strong and vibrant culture. What made the book come together and be a great book was the fact that the guy initially took advantage of the way people reacted to the myth of the "inviolable postman" for his own benefit, but over time he saw how he could use it to rebuild a unified society for the betterment not only of himself but everyone else (except for those who wanted to exploit others for their own advancement). A corollary to that was that certain individuals and groups destroy society by tearing down our shared "myths" for their own aggrandizement.
Ah yes, one of those people who think that anyone who does not want the government telling them what, and how much, they can eat is an anarchist. I always love that about Slashdot, how a certain number of people think that anyone who suggests that our government has too much power wants the government to have no power.
Yeah, I wonder if they ruin it by missing the point the way the did with with David Brin's "Postman" (which would have won the Hugo and Nebula had it come out any other year).
Fascism and socialism are only polar opposites if you think that state control of the economy encompasses the complete range of political options.
Both fascism and socialism are about state control of the economy for the "best interest" of "the people". The only difference is how they define what is the "best interest" and sometimes "the people". However, in the long run they both end up the same place, with all economic activity being managed for the interests of the elites who run things.
Fascists and Socialists are separated by a hair's worth of difference when it comes to government control over economic activity and respecting the rights of individuals.
If a customer gets burned by a poorly-working feature, they'll forget about it by the time they're ready to make their next purchase,
This is the same mental mistake the U.S. car manufacturers made in the 70s. It will take longer with this stuff because it is less critical to the long term operation of the car, but in a few years, certain manufacturers' cars will have a lower resale value than those of other manufacturers because they made these decisions now. This will lead fewer people being willing to buy their cars new. Sooner or later, one or more manufacturer will realize that they can gain an edge in the market by selling a vehicle with replaceable units in those functions (probably a manufacturer with a poor reputation--such as the Japanese car manufacturers had in the late 60s). This manufacturer will become the new standard. It will take 10-20 years (just as it took the Japanese manufacturers 10-20 years to go from being considered cheap and unreliable to being considered top quality).
However, the UK has a much higher level of home invasion robberies per capita than the U.S.. In the U.S., robbers generally work very hard to avoid going in to a house that they think might be occupied.
That is my philosophy. I put it this way. I am betting that the product I am buying is a good product, that's why I am buying it. If it is a good product, then the extended warranty is a waste of money. Why would I bet that I am wrong by buying an extended warranty?
When a salesman tries to sell me the extended warranty, I always ask them, "So, you're saying I picked the wrong one?"
Did that happen? The answer is no. Since no one got hurt and nothing got destroyed, AND that was her intention, this was harmless fun. If she had hurt someone or destroyed property that was not her own, or if she had intended to hurt someone or destroy property that was not her own, then it would not have been harmless fun.
What does being to the "left" mean to you? Most people when they say to the "left" mean favoring strict government regulation of economic activity (they usually claim to favor strict government regulation of corporations, but the effect is strict government regulation of everybody but the corporations). So, what do you mean?
By referring to them as "right-wing" dictators, you reveal that you have a very short political spectrum. Most U.S. conservatives consider that the political spectrum should run from totalitarians are one end and anarchy at the other. Of course, the left which likes to see state power increased constantly tries to make the political spectrum run from Communistic dictatorship on one end to Fascist dictatorship on the other. Since the only difference between the two is whether the government (or as the Communists put it "the people") own the means of production or whether certain private individuals own the means of production but are told what to produce by the government there is barely enough room between them to slide a piece of paper. Both fascists on the "right" and communists on the "left" believe in the government controlling all economic activity (and most personal behavior).
I draw the line where someone put it together in order to destroy things and/or kill people. Of course, if they put it together in order to destroy things, if those things which are their property and there is no reason to think that harm could have come to others (or the property of others) in the detonation of the bomb, it still falls under the heading of harmless fun in my book.
Yes, but the school is supposed to be the a source of wisdom and knowledge for developing adults.
Whatever gave you that idea? School is supposed to turn out good little drones to work in the factories owned by their betters, well at least that is the purpose behind public schools. The children of their betters will go to private schools or receive private tutoring.
Does Denmark spend more as a percentage of GDP than the U.S. government combined with a U.S. state government, because in the U.S. government tasks are divided between the several states and the federal government?
When you compared the relative size of government between Denmark and the U.S., did you include the individual states on the U.S. side? Denmark's government compares to a U.S. state which also does the tasks handled in the U.S. by the federal government.
Well, whether you consider that left or right depends on whether you think the Democratic Party is to the right or the left of the Republican Party. The post you responded to was on the Democratic Party side of the political spectrum.
They don't want to give it up, but they also don't want to go the way of other computer vendors who suffered major value drops (many going out of business) because they tried to protect the market for their high margin devices by not releasing any products in the emerging low margin market, or, if they did release a product in that market, crippling it so that it was unable to compete with their high margin offerings. Historically, those vendors suffered because someone else moved into that market...on the chip side that someone was Intel.
Well to understand the relationship between modern American "liberalism" and government control/police states a good starting place would be the book "Liberal Fascism". However, consider a political hero of the modern left in America, FDR. FDR expressed strong admiration for both the fascists of Europe and of Stalin.
Well, I see why I see so much less of it than you. I primarily see comments on the news from "conservatives". I was going to try and give a detailed explanation of the relationship between modern American "liberalism" and the desire for government control, but it got to complicated for a post here. I will sum up by saying that modern American "liberalism" is repackaged progressivism and fascism was a progressive ideology.
On the one hand, this is the U.S. and we have a 4th amendment to our constitution, that does being secure in ones person in addition to papers and effects, which draws a pretty clear line(though not clear enough) about when a warrant is required.
Did you see the way that they searched Watertown looking for these guys? The people of Watertown were not "secure in ones person" when they were being held at gunpoint by the authorities while those authorities searched their houses.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but that was written over one hundred years ago and is hard to understand.
I have never actually watched the movie (I missed it when it first came out because I have never been much of a movie person). Many of my friends told me how bad it was, so I did not spend money to watch it but when the opportunity came to watch it for free, I started to watch it. That only lasted about five minutes when I realized they had completely missed David Brin's point. The theme of the movie was not even one of the themes of the book.
The point of the book was about the powers of shared myths (whether true or not didn't matter, as long as everyone bought into the myth) for building a strong and vibrant culture. What made the book come together and be a great book was the fact that the guy initially took advantage of the way people reacted to the myth of the "inviolable postman" for his own benefit, but over time he saw how he could use it to rebuild a unified society for the betterment not only of himself but everyone else (except for those who wanted to exploit others for their own advancement). A corollary to that was that certain individuals and groups destroy society by tearing down our shared "myths" for their own aggrandizement.
Ah yes, one of those people who think that anyone who does not want the government telling them what, and how much, they can eat is an anarchist. I always love that about Slashdot, how a certain number of people think that anyone who suggests that our government has too much power wants the government to have no power.
Yeah, I wonder if they ruin it by missing the point the way the did with with David Brin's "Postman" (which would have won the Hugo and Nebula had it come out any other year).
Fascism and socialism are only polar opposites if you think that state control of the economy encompasses the complete range of political options.
Both fascism and socialism are about state control of the economy for the "best interest" of "the people". The only difference is how they define what is the "best interest" and sometimes "the people". However, in the long run they both end up the same place, with all economic activity being managed for the interests of the elites who run things.
Fascists and Socialists are separated by a hair's worth of difference when it comes to government control over economic activity and respecting the rights of individuals.
If a customer gets burned by a poorly-working feature, they'll forget about it by the time they're ready to make their next purchase,
This is the same mental mistake the U.S. car manufacturers made in the 70s. It will take longer with this stuff because it is less critical to the long term operation of the car, but in a few years, certain manufacturers' cars will have a lower resale value than those of other manufacturers because they made these decisions now. This will lead fewer people being willing to buy their cars new. Sooner or later, one or more manufacturer will realize that they can gain an edge in the market by selling a vehicle with replaceable units in those functions (probably a manufacturer with a poor reputation--such as the Japanese car manufacturers had in the late 60s). This manufacturer will become the new standard. It will take 10-20 years (just as it took the Japanese manufacturers 10-20 years to go from being considered cheap and unreliable to being considered top quality).
However, the UK has a much higher level of home invasion robberies per capita than the U.S.. In the U.S., robbers generally work very hard to avoid going in to a house that they think might be occupied.
That is my philosophy. I put it this way. I am betting that the product I am buying is a good product, that's why I am buying it. If it is a good product, then the extended warranty is a waste of money. Why would I bet that I am wrong by buying an extended warranty?
When a salesman tries to sell me the extended warranty, I always ask them, "So, you're saying I picked the wrong one?"
Did that happen? The answer is no. Since no one got hurt and nothing got destroyed, AND that was her intention, this was harmless fun. If she had hurt someone or destroyed property that was not her own, or if she had intended to hurt someone or destroy property that was not her own, then it would not have been harmless fun.
What does being to the "left" mean to you? Most people when they say to the "left" mean favoring strict government regulation of economic activity (they usually claim to favor strict government regulation of corporations, but the effect is strict government regulation of everybody but the corporations). So, what do you mean?
By referring to them as "right-wing" dictators, you reveal that you have a very short political spectrum. Most U.S. conservatives consider that the political spectrum should run from totalitarians are one end and anarchy at the other. Of course, the left which likes to see state power increased constantly tries to make the political spectrum run from Communistic dictatorship on one end to Fascist dictatorship on the other. Since the only difference between the two is whether the government (or as the Communists put it "the people") own the means of production or whether certain private individuals own the means of production but are told what to produce by the government there is barely enough room between them to slide a piece of paper. Both fascists on the "right" and communists on the "left" believe in the government controlling all economic activity (and most personal behavior).
Which of course is why I suspect that racism is behind this. In my experience, New Yorkers are more likely to be racist than Southerners.
I draw the line where someone put it together in order to destroy things and/or kill people. Of course, if they put it together in order to destroy things, if those things which are their property and there is no reason to think that harm could have come to others (or the property of others) in the detonation of the bomb, it still falls under the heading of harmless fun in my book.
Yes, but the school is supposed to be the a source of wisdom and knowledge for developing adults.
Whatever gave you that idea? School is supposed to turn out good little drones to work in the factories owned by their betters, well at least that is the purpose behind public schools. The children of their betters will go to private schools or receive private tutoring.
Except of course the likelihood of surviving more than five years after being diagnosed with cancer, where in most cases it ranks number one.
I would make one exception to that. I can refuse to allow my work to be published/distributed for seven years.
Does Denmark spend more as a percentage of GDP than the U.S. government combined with a U.S. state government, because in the U.S. government tasks are divided between the several states and the federal government?
When you compared the relative size of government between Denmark and the U.S., did you include the individual states on the U.S. side? Denmark's government compares to a U.S. state which also does the tasks handled in the U.S. by the federal government.
Well, whether you consider that left or right depends on whether you think the Democratic Party is to the right or the left of the Republican Party. The post you responded to was on the Democratic Party side of the political spectrum.
They don't want to give it up, but they also don't want to go the way of other computer vendors who suffered major value drops (many going out of business) because they tried to protect the market for their high margin devices by not releasing any products in the emerging low margin market, or, if they did release a product in that market, crippling it so that it was unable to compete with their high margin offerings. Historically, those vendors suffered because someone else moved into that market...on the chip side that someone was Intel.
Well to understand the relationship between modern American "liberalism" and government control/police states a good starting place would be the book "Liberal Fascism". However, consider a political hero of the modern left in America, FDR. FDR expressed strong admiration for both the fascists of Europe and of Stalin.
Well, I see why I see so much less of it than you. I primarily see comments on the news from "conservatives". I was going to try and give a detailed explanation of the relationship between modern American "liberalism" and the desire for government control, but it got to complicated for a post here. I will sum up by saying that modern American "liberalism" is repackaged progressivism and fascism was a progressive ideology.
On the one hand, this is the U.S. and we have a 4th amendment to our constitution, that does being secure in ones person in addition to papers and effects, which draws a pretty clear line(though not clear enough) about when a warrant is required.
Did you see the way that they searched Watertown looking for these guys? The people of Watertown were not "secure in ones person" when they were being held at gunpoint by the authorities while those authorities searched their houses.