Not entirely a troll. Some languages make it easier to have terrible consequences for a minor error than others. Some are more likely to complain and error out when something that looks mistake like happens.
Some places avoid that by recognizing natural consequences as a defense for minor assaults. Effectively I punched his face because he was being an asshole might just fly in court.
In the first case, it's for the public protection. Or do you like the idea of a bunch of people with untreated communicable diseases crowding onto a subway car with you?
The second is also for the public protection, or do you like the idea of a different bunch of party animals keeping you awake each night and not even thinking to invite you?
It could be argued that if abandoning ship is harder, investors will become more interested in the long term well being of the ship and less interested in short term stock value plays that will crash the company in the long term.
If you pull back a bit you'll see that the tighter spreads and faster trades happen at the cost of losing some of the profit. Kill all the HST and the same fundamentals will apply, when buy >=ask, the stock trades. The difference is that you won't have someone elbowing you out of the way with your buy in order to snatch it up and immediately sell it to you for a bit more than you should have needed to spend.
You forgot, it will cost 10K just to have an analyst look at a signature. That may be OK if 100K hangs in the balance, but not so much if $1000 is in dispute.
More to the point though, we most definitely do not use the same kwikset doorknobs for fort knox that we use for our front doors, yet we still ritually sign deals worth millions with the same technology we use to charge a cup of coffee. It's actually much easier to sign a credit slip with a scrawl that will convince the barista or sales person than it is to pick a lock. By the time it's noticed, you're long gone. The tools to pick or bump a lock make intent rather easy to prove before you've even done anything. Possession of a pen shows nothing.
Adam Smith warned against granting corporate charters unless it was absolutely necessary. In theory, the cornerstone of a charter is to be the public good. If enforced, that may mean not maximizing shareholder value. But then, they knew that going in.
Absentee ownership of business coupled with no liability is a terrible way to organize an economy.
Right now, it's not enough. If the trends continue, it could happen. No matter how you try, you're not going to convince a bunch of soldiers that their dads, brothers, and uncles are queer. In the '30s, socialism was a hard sell on Wall street but it was starting to sound pretty good in Hooverville.
It has been a very long time since FAX could be considered point to point. Even over a pots line, it has been a long time since it was accomplished by a series of relays connecting copper wire to form a contiguous circuit.
One of the dirty secrets out there is that signatures don't ACTUALLY mean much. The minimum cost to analyse a signature for authenticity is about 10K and even then all you will get is an opinion of the liklihood that the signature is authentic.
They are legally assigned a great deal of weight, but that's a fiction.
Because it's happening in a stagnant economy. This has come about before, and was corrected with the New Deal. I'm not claiming automation will end us, just that we're going to need another New Deal to balance the books.
As for the rest, perhaps you hadn't noticed prices going up and the many conservation measures that have been implemented.
Slashdot Mirror
Not entirely a troll. Some languages make it easier to have terrible consequences for a minor error than others. Some are more likely to complain and error out when something that looks mistake like happens.
In this case, deciding that int('123test') = 123
It said they're legal persons, it didn't claim they're human.
And a company is not a human.
Some places avoid that by recognizing natural consequences as a defense for minor assaults. Effectively I punched his face because he was being an asshole might just fly in court.
In the first case, it's for the public protection. Or do you like the idea of a bunch of people with untreated communicable diseases crowding onto a subway car with you?
The second is also for the public protection, or do you like the idea of a different bunch of party animals keeping you awake each night and not even thinking to invite you?
It could be argued that if abandoning ship is harder, investors will become more interested in the long term well being of the ship and less interested in short term stock value plays that will crash the company in the long term.
If you pull back a bit you'll see that the tighter spreads and faster trades happen at the cost of losing some of the profit. Kill all the HST and the same fundamentals will apply, when buy >=ask, the stock trades. The difference is that you won't have someone elbowing you out of the way with your buy in order to snatch it up and immediately sell it to you for a bit more than you should have needed to spend.
You forgot, it will cost 10K just to have an analyst look at a signature. That may be OK if 100K hangs in the balance, but not so much if $1000 is in dispute.
More to the point though, we most definitely do not use the same kwikset doorknobs for fort knox that we use for our front doors, yet we still ritually sign deals worth millions with the same technology we use to charge a cup of coffee. It's actually much easier to sign a credit slip with a scrawl that will convince the barista or sales person than it is to pick a lock. By the time it's noticed, you're long gone. The tools to pick or bump a lock make intent rather easy to prove before you've even done anything. Possession of a pen shows nothing.
And someone hacks the turrets.
Adam Smith warned against granting corporate charters unless it was absolutely necessary. In theory, the cornerstone of a charter is to be the public good. If enforced, that may mean not maximizing shareholder value. But then, they knew that going in.
Absentee ownership of business coupled with no liability is a terrible way to organize an economy.
Better keep up the budget for circuses or too many people will notice they can't see it because they couldn't pay the cable bill.
Right now, it's not enough. If the trends continue, it could happen. No matter how you try, you're not going to convince a bunch of soldiers that their dads, brothers, and uncles are queer. In the '30s, socialism was a hard sell on Wall street but it was starting to sound pretty good in Hooverville.
Now THAT's an idea. A tweet to fax service for FBI FOIA requests.
It has been a very long time since FAX could be considered point to point. Even over a pots line, it has been a long time since it was accomplished by a series of relays connecting copper wire to form a contiguous circuit.
One of the dirty secrets out there is that signatures don't ACTUALLY mean much. The minimum cost to analyse a signature for authenticity is about 10K and even then all you will get is an opinion of the liklihood that the signature is authentic.
They are legally assigned a great deal of weight, but that's a fiction.
They're actually increasing the processing cost by not doing it electronically.
Note that the dissatisfied here include Gulf War veterans, National Guardsmen, and for that matter active members of the armed services.
It's going to take more time than the aristocracy here has to get to the starting point in Zimbabwe.
Because it's happening in a stagnant economy. This has come about before, and was corrected with the New Deal. I'm not claiming automation will end us, just that we're going to need another New Deal to balance the books.
As for the rest, perhaps you hadn't noticed prices going up and the many conservation measures that have been implemented.
That didn't work out so well (for the aristocracy) in France. It didn't work any better for the Tsar.
We don't have to break into your bunker. Filling the entrance and vent with concrete will be sufficient.
18th century puritan morals guiding a 21st century economy. Probably not a great idea.
What makes you believe that people won't do anything?
Exactly. Nobody but the Democratic party leadership wanted more of the same.
You should re-read what I wrote.
Given the numbers, it's more likely they'll kill the rich.
Guillotine!