You are so close...but you've missed a point. Apple customers do pay more for their iStuff (as I have good reason to know), which is why Apple enjoys high profits on its hardware while Dell and HP and the like scrape by on razor-thin margins. The problem isn't really the consumer not wanting to pay more, the problem is that (in the West, at least), the typical middle-class consumer has been facing shrinking real wages since Reagan and Thatcher and that crowd ruled the world. People can afford to pay less, and so they search harder for bargains. They buy consumer-grade crap that's cheap at the till but has to be replaced every three years because that's what they can afford.
So what is the problem? Well that's easy...follow the money. Real wages have been dropping, the middle class shrinking, and yet the economy has been growing (with occasional recessions, mind). Where's the money going? To the top. the top 0.1% of income-earners have been experiencing steady increases in their wealth for the same time period. The reality is that conditions in China (and everywhere else) would be best improved if those at the very top of the pyramid would start disgorging some of that wealth to the benefit of the rest of us.
Basic conflict-checking should be mostly an automated process. The existing off-the-shelf software has conflict-checking built in, that searches your client database when you open the file.
It's about more than just money --- it's a policy argument. the argument is that choking off such a large market would have much greater effects than just reducing the revenue streams of Google, Amazon and others. Employees would be laid off, businesses that rely on the services would suffer (including small sole proprietorships), the economy would probably be measurably affected. Courts generally have some obligation to consider these matters when they render judgments.
You do know that the income gap in China is narrowing, right? And it's widening in the US? Conditions in China are bad, but getting better. Conditions for workers in America are much better, but getting worse. Who's getting hurt here?
This is an expression of the free market at work, with a good dose of unintentional consequences for the corporate masters who shipped all the jobs overseas in hopes of getting cheap labour, thereby increasing the value of that labour, and slowly improving the lot of the workers there (at the expense of the workers back home, of course). All this crying and gnashing of teeth ignores the fact that conditions in China are improving for workers, and American workers don't like that.
The real problem isn't the shipping of jobs to one part of the world or another. The real problem is executive compensation. The leeches at the top pay themselves hundreds or possibly thousands of times the wages of the people at the bottom of the supply chain, instead of limiting themselves to something reasonable (but still quite a lot of money) and making sure that everyone else in the chain makes a decent standard of living.
I agree, I wasn't disputing that. But the may have the right to take and hold real evidence, and still be held responsible for returning property that is not relevant to the crime being investigated. Especially in this case, where returning a copy of the legitimately uploaded files would be sufficient.
I don't know if this is the case, but if I were a lawyer looking to start a class action to get some of those files back, this is where I'd start my research.
One could argue that setting humanity back a few centuries and wiping out half the population would be good for the planet (and perhaps ultimately save the species). It's not an argument I'd be prepared to make, but it's one I'd take seriously, if someone else were to make it.
Unless, perhaps, the "evidence" in question is files uploaded to Megaupload by their rightful copyright owners (ie: exactly the class of people who would be suing the gov to get their files back). Those files would not be evidence of a crime, because no crime took place in their transfer from computer to Megaupload to whoever downloaded them.
Correction: Workers in countries with universal healthcare take less sick days or show up to work sick less often and for shorter amounts of time (and are therefore more productive)....etc.
Workers in countries with universal health care take less sick days and cost their employers less when they do get sick. That's why the bosses should want a universal health care plan (not just guaranteed, universal). Also, healthcare costs less overall, which is a net benefit for everyone. Despite what people think, there are benefits that accrue to the upper class when the middle and lower classes are kept healthy and happy.
Yes, but the computer you buy has one or the other, or at least one or the other is active, and the end user doesn't care which one it is or whether she could switch between them. The point isn't that there aren't different versions of Windows, the point is that most end-users don't care.
As far as most users are concerned, there is only one version of Windows; the one that came on the computer they bought. Buy a new computer, with a new version of Windows? Oh well, just use the new one. The vast majority of home computer buyers (and many many business buyers) don't ever deviate from the OS that comes in the box, even to simply roll back the OS to the one they were familiar with before.
And yet, your health care expenses per person are less than half that of the US. Interesting. I don't think you can blame your fantastic health care for your high taxes.
I thought that he's been at the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Ontario Canada for the last few years? If so, then Health Canada has made a contribution.
But it's the emotional ties that make them so vitriolic about the flaws they do find in their favourite product. Ah well, it would take some actual research to sort out who's right, and I for one won't be doing that.
Except you didn't read my post properly. What I was saying is that the fanboy often is the upset customer. The person who comes to slashdot to viciously defend his favourite phone is often the one screeching loudest about some flaw in the phone or its os on the support forums. Just because he doesn't acknowledge his phone's flaws here doesn't mean he doesn't acknowledge those flaw to himself (and subsequently rage about those flaws in a friendlier forum).
Except that this is patently untrue in at least one instance that I can think of: Apple products. The most vicious Apple-bashing posts I've ever read were from Apple fanboys who got their feelings hurt when they found out some bug was unfixable or a key feature was changed to some other behaviour. They (perhaps I should say "we"? But I don't see myself as a fanboy, despite having a lot of apple gear) are also quite capable of having reasonable discussions about the failings of their favourite products when not being attacked by "outsiders" and fandroids. You're right that it's the emotional investment that makes the fanboy wars so nasty, but don't make the mistake of believing that these people all are incapable of seeing the flaws in the products they've invested their emotions in. It's less about "blind faith" and more about "let's keep our dirty laundry in the family."
Slashdot Mirror
No, they are exempt from being recognized as Democrats. Maybe you need to view at a lower level.
Hate to break it to you, but these days, it's the banks getting the house, not the kids.
You are so close...but you've missed a point. Apple customers do pay more for their iStuff (as I have good reason to know), which is why Apple enjoys high profits on its hardware while Dell and HP and the like scrape by on razor-thin margins. The problem isn't really the consumer not wanting to pay more, the problem is that (in the West, at least), the typical middle-class consumer has been facing shrinking real wages since Reagan and Thatcher and that crowd ruled the world. People can afford to pay less, and so they search harder for bargains. They buy consumer-grade crap that's cheap at the till but has to be replaced every three years because that's what they can afford.
So what is the problem? Well that's easy...follow the money. Real wages have been dropping, the middle class shrinking, and yet the economy has been growing (with occasional recessions, mind). Where's the money going? To the top. the top 0.1% of income-earners have been experiencing steady increases in their wealth for the same time period. The reality is that conditions in China (and everywhere else) would be best improved if those at the very top of the pyramid would start disgorging some of that wealth to the benefit of the rest of us.
And even sole practitioners can usually afford PCLaw or similar software.
Other than the problem of losing one of their biggest - if not the biggest - clients.
Basic conflict-checking should be mostly an automated process. The existing off-the-shelf software has conflict-checking built in, that searches your client database when you open the file.
It's about more than just money --- it's a policy argument. the argument is that choking off such a large market would have much greater effects than just reducing the revenue streams of Google, Amazon and others. Employees would be laid off, businesses that rely on the services would suffer (including small sole proprietorships), the economy would probably be measurably affected. Courts generally have some obligation to consider these matters when they render judgments.
You do know that the income gap in China is narrowing, right? And it's widening in the US? Conditions in China are bad, but getting better. Conditions for workers in America are much better, but getting worse. Who's getting hurt here?
This is an expression of the free market at work, with a good dose of unintentional consequences for the corporate masters who shipped all the jobs overseas in hopes of getting cheap labour, thereby increasing the value of that labour, and slowly improving the lot of the workers there (at the expense of the workers back home, of course). All this crying and gnashing of teeth ignores the fact that conditions in China are improving for workers, and American workers don't like that.
The real problem isn't the shipping of jobs to one part of the world or another. The real problem is executive compensation. The leeches at the top pay themselves hundreds or possibly thousands of times the wages of the people at the bottom of the supply chain, instead of limiting themselves to something reasonable (but still quite a lot of money) and making sure that everyone else in the chain makes a decent standard of living.
So you're saying American workers deserve to earn a living more than Chinese workers?
I agree, I wasn't disputing that. But the may have the right to take and hold real evidence, and still be held responsible for returning property that is not relevant to the crime being investigated. Especially in this case, where returning a copy of the legitimately uploaded files would be sufficient.
I don't know if this is the case, but if I were a lawyer looking to start a class action to get some of those files back, this is where I'd start my research.
One could argue that setting humanity back a few centuries and wiping out half the population would be good for the planet (and perhaps ultimately save the species). It's not an argument I'd be prepared to make, but it's one I'd take seriously, if someone else were to make it.
Unless, perhaps, the "evidence" in question is files uploaded to Megaupload by their rightful copyright owners (ie: exactly the class of people who would be suing the gov to get their files back). Those files would not be evidence of a crime, because no crime took place in their transfer from computer to Megaupload to whoever downloaded them.
Correction: Workers in countries with universal healthcare take less sick days or show up to work sick less often and for shorter amounts of time (and are therefore more productive)....etc.
Workers in countries with universal health care take less sick days and cost their employers less when they do get sick. That's why the bosses should want a universal health care plan (not just guaranteed, universal). Also, healthcare costs less overall, which is a net benefit for everyone. Despite what people think, there are benefits that accrue to the upper class when the middle and lower classes are kept healthy and happy.
sorry, I misinterpreted your post, then.
Yes, but the computer you buy has one or the other, or at least one or the other is active, and the end user doesn't care which one it is or whether she could switch between them. The point isn't that there aren't different versions of Windows, the point is that most end-users don't care.
Perhaps more to the point: with Linux, fragmentation is a feature. Not always a very useful one, but a feature nonetheless.
As far as most users are concerned, there is only one version of Windows; the one that came on the computer they bought. Buy a new computer, with a new version of Windows? Oh well, just use the new one. The vast majority of home computer buyers (and many many business buyers) don't ever deviate from the OS that comes in the box, even to simply roll back the OS to the one they were familiar with before.
But if you want a working app that lots of people will enjoy using, you have to hire both. Or find one person who understands both.
But only until you observe them.
And yet, your health care expenses per person are less than half that of the US. Interesting. I don't think you can blame your fantastic health care for your high taxes.
I thought that he's been at the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Ontario Canada for the last few years? If so, then Health Canada has made a contribution.
But it's the emotional ties that make them so vitriolic about the flaws they do find in their favourite product. Ah well, it would take some actual research to sort out who's right, and I for one won't be doing that.
Except you didn't read my post properly. What I was saying is that the fanboy often is the upset customer. The person who comes to slashdot to viciously defend his favourite phone is often the one screeching loudest about some flaw in the phone or its os on the support forums. Just because he doesn't acknowledge his phone's flaws here doesn't mean he doesn't acknowledge those flaw to himself (and subsequently rage about those flaws in a friendlier forum).
Shit, I just been trolled, haven't I? Ah well.
Except that this is patently untrue in at least one instance that I can think of: Apple products. The most vicious Apple-bashing posts I've ever read were from Apple fanboys who got their feelings hurt when they found out some bug was unfixable or a key feature was changed to some other behaviour. They (perhaps I should say "we"? But I don't see myself as a fanboy, despite having a lot of apple gear) are also quite capable of having reasonable discussions about the failings of their favourite products when not being attacked by "outsiders" and fandroids. You're right that it's the emotional investment that makes the fanboy wars so nasty, but don't make the mistake of believing that these people all are incapable of seeing the flaws in the products they've invested their emotions in. It's less about "blind faith" and more about "let's keep our dirty laundry in the family."