I think what he meant is that the brother who is lying, and saying his brother did it, is the real low life (as he is not only a rapist, but tried to implicate his brother). I could be wrong though.
Somewhere, a Nintendo exec is opening a bottle of Jack Daniels to pour a toast to the one year they had a current gen console.
If you define "generation" by technological capabilities, then yes. If you use the actual definition, then they have had a current gen console for years, and Sony and Microsoft are now joining the next gen that Nintendo started back in November.
Yeah, that's real possible for those of us who live alone. We have to go out in order to do those fairly unimportant things like buying groceries, or medicine, or...
Well, Rome Total War 2 isn't a THQ game, so no need to worry there. And CoH 2 is so far along in development that even if THQ tanks, it's all but guaranteed that whoever buys the rights will pay Relic the (relatively) small amount that it will take to finish the game, and reap the profits. I have no doubt that we will see CoH 2, regardless of what happens with THQ.
I don't know that I'd say it's better, but for most people it's not any worse. That's the truly important thing. Most people have already memorized the conversions they need, so it's already just as easy for them to use imperial as metric units. The only people that a switch to metric benefits are those who have to do lots of imperial-metric conversions, or kids who are currently in school and haven't learned the conversions yet. For everyone else, metric is actually a huge pain in the ass, because they have to re-learn to think in those units. So, for most people, the switch doesn't benefit them - but comes with a large drawback.
It's really not hard to see why the US isn't in a hurry to switch. And as one of the people for whom a switch to metric would be nuisance rather than benefit, I hope they never do (or at least, not in my lifetime).
"Sense" has nothing to do with anything you or him are saying. You're using very specific terms with very specific meanings in wholly inappropriate ways. It's the equivalent of someone who uses "Nazi" or a similar negative label as a synonym for "someone I don't like". It's the most laughable thing I've ever heard. I would have had no problem if you both simply said that you didn't feel Steam was an acceptable thing to have on your PC, because as I said - one can make legitimate arguments to that effect. But no, you had to go off into fantasy land and start calling things "rootkits" and "malware" which are legitimate software, and then try to defend your "arguments" (such as they are) with factually incorrect statements. It's one hell of a joke, and I have never seen anybody quite so woefully ignorant before.
You really are an idiot, and have no idea what the fuck a rootkit is (or perhaps no idea what the fuck Steam is, it's hard to say). Steam does not trick you into installing it. It does not hide the things it does. You may not agree with its activities (and as I have already said, one can reasonably do so), but it is quite up front about what it does and what its purposes are. That singlehandedly disqualifies it from being a rootkit.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Seriously, stop that bullshit. There are legitimate arguments to be made against the use or acceptance of Steam. I personally feel it is worth the drawbacks and/or risks, but I have no problem with those who feel otherwise. But slinging about terms like "malware" is complete bullshit, and does the community a great disservice.
You either have absolutely no concept of what a rootkit is, or absolutely no concept of how to accurately present information. Pick one.
I'd be willing to respect your opinion if you said that using Steam to access software you purchased is an unacceptably large amount of DRM, or somesuch argument. I'd be willing to respect your opinion if you said that it was too much power to put in any company's hands, or even Valve's in particular. But when you start calling Steam a rootkit, you veer off into pure bullshit land. It's just ridiculous.
I understood your point completely and I think you are being a hypocrite. You expect companies (and presumably individuals) to pay more tax than they are legally obligated to pay while apparently not doing the same thing yourself. You seem to believe that company management should abandon their fiduciary duty and thus break the law in order to fulfill your perception of the spirit of the law by paying taxes they legally do not owe. Let me repeat that. Company management that pays unnecessary taxes is in violation of their legal duties.
Bullshit. A company's fiduciary duty to its investors does not include unethical behavior, despite the fact that many unscrupulous businesses use that as an excuse for their poor behavior.
Why not? If it is legal, beneficial and you have the means to do so but don't, then you are either lazy or foolish.
No, I have a sense of fair and ethical behavior.
Fraud is an intentional deception. There is no deception here. These companies are being quite up front about what it is they are doing and generally speaking they scrupulously follow the laws. If you don't like what they are doing, change the laws.
No, no deception at all. Just hiding the money they made via accounting tricks. </sarcasm>
Do you really believe that ethics stops and starts with the law? For God's sake, we teach children in school about how legal behavior is not the same as ethical behavior. Everyone should understand this fundamental concept.
You clearly don't understand my point. My point is not to pay more than you have to; my point is to stop using shady means to get out of your tax burden. I didn't put any extra money into my taxes next year, but neither did I set up offshore corporations to play accounting games. That crosses a line, and you ought to recognize that instead of defending the people who are defrauding us (or in this case, the people of the UK).
Some businesses have good ethics, to be sure. But enough don't that the statement has significant merit. Look at companies like Foxconn, and how many people will rise to their defense, despite their piss-poor treatment of their workers. You don't need to shit on everybody else to make a profit, but that is what a lot of companies will do to maximize profits unless prohibited by law. Nor do you need to engage in shady-ass behavior like setting up tax shelters. Using such means to exploit loopholes in the tax code is profoundly unethical.
You act as though I'm advocating for lots of taxes, but I'm not. I'm advocating for not wriggling out of your obligations using shady tactics. The current tax law can stand a ton of improvement, but exploiting loopholes in order to avoid it... that's unacceptable.
This has jack shit do do with "wealth envy". Stop spouting generalized rhetoric and address the issue. The point is that exploiting legal loopholes to avoid your tax burden is unethical. It's unethical when an individual does it, it's unethical when a corporation does it. The fact that it is commonplace does not make it justifiable behavior.
You're looking at it wrong. The point is that exploiting loopholes to escape your tax obligation (and don't give me the "it's legal" crock of shit; setting up offshore accounts and corporations in other countries is obviously shady however legal it is) is unethical, not that paying taxes is ethical.
No. If you answer yes, you have a sense of ethics. But you're right, such a person will probably be replaced because businesses don't tolerate ethical behavior unless said behavior is required by law.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, I don't get it either. Personally, I think those old keyboards are shit and not used any more for a reason. But some people like 'em, so...
Also, by his reasoning we should start killing our population off, because then we'll produce less CO2 when they're dead. What a moron.
I think what he meant is that the brother who is lying, and saying his brother did it, is the real low life (as he is not only a rapist, but tried to implicate his brother). I could be wrong though.
The fuck? How on earth is it a conspiracy of any kind to claim yourself to be innocent when you are?
I don't think that kind of language is called for, even on the internet.
I don't think that you can actually edit a comment once posted (or at least, I can't find a way). What did you do?
Wait, what??
Somewhere, a Nintendo exec is opening a bottle of Jack Daniels to pour a toast to the one year they had a current gen console.
If you define "generation" by technological capabilities, then yes. If you use the actual definition, then they have had a current gen console for years, and Sony and Microsoft are now joining the next gen that Nintendo started back in November.
Higher instances take into consideration the results of lower instances.
Normally that'd be true, but this is the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit we're talking about here.
I'm sure they're aware of that, as is anyone with a shred of knowledge about computer security (or hell, security in general). What is your point?
Because only 2 out of the 8 classes are Jedi.
Yeah, that's real possible for those of us who live alone. We have to go out in order to do those fairly unimportant things like buying groceries, or medicine, or...
Well, Rome Total War 2 isn't a THQ game, so no need to worry there. And CoH 2 is so far along in development that even if THQ tanks, it's all but guaranteed that whoever buys the rights will pay Relic the (relatively) small amount that it will take to finish the game, and reap the profits. I have no doubt that we will see CoH 2, regardless of what happens with THQ.
I don't know that I'd say it's better, but for most people it's not any worse. That's the truly important thing. Most people have already memorized the conversions they need, so it's already just as easy for them to use imperial as metric units. The only people that a switch to metric benefits are those who have to do lots of imperial-metric conversions, or kids who are currently in school and haven't learned the conversions yet. For everyone else, metric is actually a huge pain in the ass, because they have to re-learn to think in those units. So, for most people, the switch doesn't benefit them - but comes with a large drawback.
It's really not hard to see why the US isn't in a hurry to switch. And as one of the people for whom a switch to metric would be nuisance rather than benefit, I hope they never do (or at least, not in my lifetime).
"Sense" has nothing to do with anything you or him are saying. You're using very specific terms with very specific meanings in wholly inappropriate ways. It's the equivalent of someone who uses "Nazi" or a similar negative label as a synonym for "someone I don't like". It's the most laughable thing I've ever heard. I would have had no problem if you both simply said that you didn't feel Steam was an acceptable thing to have on your PC, because as I said - one can make legitimate arguments to that effect. But no, you had to go off into fantasy land and start calling things "rootkits" and "malware" which are legitimate software, and then try to defend your "arguments" (such as they are) with factually incorrect statements. It's one hell of a joke, and I have never seen anybody quite so woefully ignorant before.
You really are an idiot, and have no idea what the fuck a rootkit is (or perhaps no idea what the fuck Steam is, it's hard to say). Steam does not trick you into installing it. It does not hide the things it does. You may not agree with its activities (and as I have already said, one can reasonably do so), but it is quite up front about what it does and what its purposes are. That singlehandedly disqualifies it from being a rootkit.
malware
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Seriously, stop that bullshit. There are legitimate arguments to be made against the use or acceptance of Steam. I personally feel it is worth the drawbacks and/or risks, but I have no problem with those who feel otherwise. But slinging about terms like "malware" is complete bullshit, and does the community a great disservice.
You either have absolutely no concept of what a rootkit is, or absolutely no concept of how to accurately present information. Pick one.
I'd be willing to respect your opinion if you said that using Steam to access software you purchased is an unacceptably large amount of DRM, or somesuch argument. I'd be willing to respect your opinion if you said that it was too much power to put in any company's hands, or even Valve's in particular. But when you start calling Steam a rootkit, you veer off into pure bullshit land. It's just ridiculous.
I understood your point completely and I think you are being a hypocrite. You expect companies (and presumably individuals) to pay more tax than they are legally obligated to pay while apparently not doing the same thing yourself. You seem to believe that company management should abandon their fiduciary duty and thus break the law in order to fulfill your perception of the spirit of the law by paying taxes they legally do not owe. Let me repeat that. Company management that pays unnecessary taxes is in violation of their legal duties.
Bullshit. A company's fiduciary duty to its investors does not include unethical behavior, despite the fact that many unscrupulous businesses use that as an excuse for their poor behavior.
Why not? If it is legal, beneficial and you have the means to do so but don't, then you are either lazy or foolish.
No, I have a sense of fair and ethical behavior.
Fraud is an intentional deception. There is no deception here. These companies are being quite up front about what it is they are doing and generally speaking they scrupulously follow the laws. If you don't like what they are doing, change the laws.
No, no deception at all. Just hiding the money they made via accounting tricks. </sarcasm>
Do you really believe that ethics stops and starts with the law? For God's sake, we teach children in school about how legal behavior is not the same as ethical behavior. Everyone should understand this fundamental concept.
If you answer yes, you are defrauding your investors.
Only if you promised them to maximize profits at any cost. Which no ethical business would do, and no business period is under an obligation to do.
You clearly don't understand my point. My point is not to pay more than you have to; my point is to stop using shady means to get out of your tax burden. I didn't put any extra money into my taxes next year, but neither did I set up offshore corporations to play accounting games. That crosses a line, and you ought to recognize that instead of defending the people who are defrauding us (or in this case, the people of the UK).
Some businesses have good ethics, to be sure. But enough don't that the statement has significant merit. Look at companies like Foxconn, and how many people will rise to their defense, despite their piss-poor treatment of their workers. You don't need to shit on everybody else to make a profit, but that is what a lot of companies will do to maximize profits unless prohibited by law. Nor do you need to engage in shady-ass behavior like setting up tax shelters. Using such means to exploit loopholes in the tax code is profoundly unethical.
You act as though I'm advocating for lots of taxes, but I'm not. I'm advocating for not wriggling out of your obligations using shady tactics. The current tax law can stand a ton of improvement, but exploiting loopholes in order to avoid it... that's unacceptable.
This has jack shit do do with "wealth envy". Stop spouting generalized rhetoric and address the issue. The point is that exploiting legal loopholes to avoid your tax burden is unethical. It's unethical when an individual does it, it's unethical when a corporation does it. The fact that it is commonplace does not make it justifiable behavior.
You're looking at it wrong. The point is that exploiting loopholes to escape your tax obligation (and don't give me the "it's legal" crock of shit; setting up offshore accounts and corporations in other countries is obviously shady however legal it is) is unethical, not that paying taxes is ethical.
No. If you answer yes, you have a sense of ethics. But you're right, such a person will probably be replaced because businesses don't tolerate ethical behavior unless said behavior is required by law.