America is the only nation in the civilized world that believes "health care is not a fundamental right", right? Nobody else, no matter how bad their health care waiting lines are, wants to adopt America's way. The operative word here is "pariah". Look it up some time.
The use of child labor to make cheaper shoes is devastating for children's rights if we reward companies that do that.
You have to make a choice between cheaper shoes or children's safety.
Capitalism says children's safety is irrelevant, and eventually we will have to go to war to decide who is right, or the alternative is that the value of all of human life will be cheapened by capitalism.
If you are looking for something major like, say, IBM, and somehow it brings you to Hitachi instead (instead of, let us say the official site "ibm-net.com"), because "ibm.com" is somehow not registered, something is wrong no matter what you say. The searcher
I'm just using IBM as a theoretical. We all know ibm.com exists, but this case I described is true for some other sites.
What is debatable here is how we right that wrong.
majid aldo's right and I made an oversight... the US, or any company therein, is quite capable of doing evil things with nanotechnology... hence the creation of the nano-ethics initiative.
My post optimistically assumed that America would be more aware of nanotech ethics than certain other countries, and that assumption remains yet to be proven.
I'm sorry for any arrogance my post conveyed.
The REAL argument is how will ethical nations, in general, compete against unethical nations, in the coming and inevitable biotech and nanotech arms race?
while foreign countries in an area of the world I won't speficially mention, will go balls-to-the-walls with potentially dangerous nanotech research by unethical means.
Who will win the nanotech race?
This reminds me of the actions of a certain Korean cloning researcher who recently got caught in a scandal.
IMHO, ethics has finally come within sight of a potential head to head battle with progress, in that ethical nations will have a disadvantage against unethical nations.
How will they prevent someone from stealing and counterfeiting the RFID reader and using that to find and destroy RFID's inside the paper (or worse yet, duplicate its data)?
Is there a way to run a current through a piece of paper to destroy the RFID?
Okay, let me clarify. If there's a place where women are offering men sex all the time, men would immigrate there from all over the world.
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
How is offering sex the same as rape sticking a plunger up someone's ass? Do you and anothy look at every offer of sex as a threat to have a plunger rammed up your ass? Woah. Where did that come from, the "All Sex is Rape" school of thought? Help me out here, I'm really confused, how does being hit on by women inherently become getting raped by a plunger?
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
And I don't know why I keep this going either. You're never going to convince me that men don't enjoy being approached by women, because most MEN genuinely do wish it would happen. How this becomes the same thing as RAPE? Beats me.
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
My "I'm not condoning rape" statement was my way of saying "Oh hell, I just KNOW someone is going to bring up that irrelevant extreme case scenario, so let's put in the disclaimer now". I guess even if God Himself came down and said "Travoltus did not mean Rape Is Acceptable", there would be atheists who'd not believe.
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
This is how gender discussions are shut down cold: someone always invokes Godwina.
Oh and just in case I forgot to say it... RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
But guys really would LIKE to be approached more by women. Not that it's likely to happen unless you're on the level of Donald Trump, Wesley Snipes or Richie Ramirez...
Who said anything about RAPE? I said I wasn't condoning it as a way of precluding paranoid people from bringing that IRRELEVANT subject matter up.
Why is it that any time someone talks about reversing the script to where MEN get equal sexual attention, you people have to immediately and reflexively bring up the rape boogeyman out of nowhere AND then dream up the 300 lb syphillis-infected whale scenario??
Are you afraid of what kind of world you'll live in if women become as aggressive about sex as men?
I said I wasn't confoning rape, and now I see tons of responses by people with poor reading comprehension who think I was. You're right, I'm talking about the fact that MOST HETERO SINGLE men would love to wake up to a world where women were OFFERING them sex instead of men always having to throw tons of game and embark on a long adventure just to prove themselves worthy of a woman's attention.
It's frighteningly pathetic to see that so many people think that if women are offering you sex, they MUST be 300lb monsters. You can't even hope to reason with minds like that.
I don't care if some moderator nails me. It's time men started being honest instead of being PC.
When a woman has to sign up for SELECTIVE SERVICE then she can come talk to me about how bad she has it in life. Oh well, women usually outlive men so they have plenty of time to gripe about how their evil oppressors held them down long after their oppressors are dead. I didn't hear women complaining about being given preferential treatment on the Titanic's lifeboats, did anyone else? Yeah, discrimination is evil only when it goes against you, not for you. That's why I'm a humanist, and not a feminist.
As for women whining about being hit on all the time and being stared at? Give me a break and a half. Us men would give our right nut to be treated that way by women. Get paid to have sex? Bring it on! Now, I'm not condoning rape at all, but sheesh, let's look at the cold hard reality here for what it is: if there was a city on Earth where women sneaked into windows and jumped on guys' wangs at night, and where a random walk by an alley was likely to end in a guy being snatched by a gang of sex starved women? Ya damned SKIPPY almost the entire world's male hetero population would immigrate there! That's the stone cold truth. Can I get a witness out there??
"Didn't think so. As much as I can recall, all their rebates are applied when you check out. Why do it any other way? Costco has to be one of the most stress free places to shop: they pay and treat their employees well, they sell high quality products at low prices and they have sane, consumer friendly policies."
Stress-free? I dunno about that. Those long lines are heck to wait in. But yeah, I am a member, and I have a relative who LOVES working there. Their prices rock, and their stuff is better quality.
BTW Costco also donates to the Democratic Party... I bet that's a surprise to some...:D
Maximizing stockholder value at all costs is the theme of laissez-faire policy.
It literally means that if you generate a ton of toxic garbage and you can dump it in someone else's yard without being caught, you have increased your shareholder value by not having to waste resources cleaning up your own mess.
That's called an externality and laissez-faire does not take into account the effects of dumping toxic garbage in someone else's yard. Oh wait, it does take it into account. It says "screw you" to the dumpEE as long as the dumpER has paid his/her due to the politicians and judges ahead of time.
Here's where laissez-faire leads to outright murder and hypocrisy: If someone in the dumpee camp dies and that death is proven to be the dumper's fault, it's called negligence and it leads to some petty fine at worst. If a loved one of the dead person comes back and retaliates, then it's punished as murder.
That is to say, you can intentionally poison the ground that some people live on, and if they die, you aren't criminally prosecuted (under laissez-faire). But if you put out a box of rat poison in someone else's yard and a dog eats it and dies...........
If they're learning CS then you're right. But I think that learning CS at all, is setting people up for a major career crash. The more effort you put into it, the harder you will fall when the fact that East Indians can match you tit for tat for pennies on your dollar, finally catches up: namely, you may have amassed a TON of college debt, only to see your job prospects vanish by the time you even graduate; 5 years later, at the most.
Given that in East India, they can learn absolutely everything that you are teaching and do it for pennies on our dollar, it will inevitably come to pass that there is no need to hire CS grads from America, and thus there'll be no point in teaching computer science in the US any more. This is a matter of when, not if.
If you're a professor, as I said, your profession may be clinging to life now and you may not even be able to see the end up ahead. I can understand thus why a CS professor might say their job is secure. But in this generation, or the next (at the latest), CS professors in America won't be any more necessary than teachers of horse cart production.
That having been said, it is wise not to even get into CS (as you well know, CS enrollment is dropping). It's wise to get into a field where you'll learn how to rent-a-coder.
Namely, the job of the future will involve management - as in, learning how to outsource, not how to program. There aren't too many management jobs to go around, though, and they too will be outsourced, and East Indian companies will do to America's tech companies what Japan is doing to the Big Three automakers now: they will undercut you by price first, then quality second, after which they'll own all your market share, and finally leave you with a billion dollars of losses a year until you finally leave the software business completely.
Of course, I am inviting a major chicken little vs the ostrich debate here, so I'll shut up.
Right, it's in both the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD format specs. But I still don't see where the porn industry anted up in the DRM war any more than they did when they moved from VHS to DVD. Many porn DVDs come out that aren't region encoded (in fact, hardly any are), and a majority of them (*ahem* *hmmmm*) aren't even CSS encrypted. You can copy them right to the hard disk and to another DVD (*sirens*). There's nothing in this article that says porn producers are looking for any kind of DRM - it's just there no matter what they choo-(*door breaking down*)
This article appeared to be more along the lines of "Adult Entertainment Antes Up In the HD DVD Format War" than "Adult Entertainment Antes Up In DRM War".
I didn't even see "DRM" or "copy protection/prevention" in the entire article.
Slashdot Mirror
America is the only nation in the civilized world that believes "health care is not a fundamental right", right? Nobody else, no matter how bad their health care waiting lines are, wants to adopt America's way. The operative word here is "pariah". Look it up some time.
Yeah but somehow it managed to happen in free market America any way. Go figure. Communism has yet to catch up with that.
And nowadays capitalism kills with negligence. Why slaughter the under class when you can lock them out and wait for them to starve to death?
what they think about the beauty of this Right Wing free market economy.
Or better yet, ask their dead ancestors. All 100-200 million of them.
The use of child labor to make cheaper shoes is devastating for children's rights if we reward companies that do that.
You have to make a choice between cheaper shoes or children's safety.
Capitalism says children's safety is irrelevant, and eventually we will have to go to war to decide who is right, or the alternative is that the value of all of human life will be cheapened by capitalism.
Most libertarians would have had America trading with Adolf Hitler if he hadn't declared war on us.
Free trade has no intrinsic regard for human rights.
Well said. You might want to read the "Time Machine" by HG Wells for a more practical demonstration of what you posted.
FACT: Any Government regulation of a free market is socialism.
I challenge you to show me one nation that is not a market socialist: namely, show me one nation that doesn't regulate its markets.
Go ahead. Show me.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you discredit Libertarianism. Have a nice day.
If you are looking for something major like, say, IBM, and somehow it brings you to Hitachi instead (instead of, let us say the official site "ibm-net.com"), because "ibm.com" is somehow not registered, something is wrong no matter what you say. The searcher
I'm just using IBM as a theoretical. We all know ibm.com exists, but this case I described is true for some other sites.
What is debatable here is how we right that wrong.
majid aldo's right and I made an oversight... the US, or any company therein, is quite capable of doing evil things with nanotechnology... hence the creation of the nano-ethics initiative.
My post optimistically assumed that America would be more aware of nanotech ethics than certain other countries, and that assumption remains yet to be proven.
I'm sorry for any arrogance my post conveyed.
The REAL argument is how will ethical nations, in general, compete against unethical nations, in the coming and inevitable biotech and nanotech arms race?
while foreign countries in an area of the world I won't speficially mention, will go balls-to-the-walls with potentially dangerous nanotech research by unethical means.
Who will win the nanotech race?
This reminds me of the actions of a certain Korean cloning researcher who recently got caught in a scandal.
IMHO, ethics has finally come within sight of a potential head to head battle with progress, in that ethical nations will have a disadvantage against unethical nations.
can someone mod the parent post please? :D
How will they prevent someone from stealing and counterfeiting the RFID reader and using that to find and destroy RFID's inside the paper (or worse yet, duplicate its data)?
Is there a way to run a current through a piece of paper to destroy the RFID?
You can't prove there isn't a terrorism-piracy link.
Therefore we need to treat pirated software / mp3's as WMD's.
We begin bombing in 5 minutes!
What's the difference any more?
The Senate just confirmed Alito to the SCOTUS.
That might actually be the mentality that we're stuck with for the next 50 years...
Okay, let me clarify. If there's a place where women are offering men sex all the time, men would immigrate there from all over the world.
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
How is offering sex the same as rape sticking a plunger up someone's ass? Do you and anothy look at every offer of sex as a threat to have a plunger rammed up your ass? Woah. Where did that come from, the "All Sex is Rape" school of thought? Help me out here, I'm really confused, how does being hit on by women inherently become getting raped by a plunger?
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
And I don't know why I keep this going either. You're never going to convince me that men don't enjoy being approached by women, because most MEN genuinely do wish it would happen. How this becomes the same thing as RAPE? Beats me.
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
My "I'm not condoning rape" statement was my way of saying "Oh hell, I just KNOW someone is going to bring up that irrelevant extreme case scenario, so let's put in the disclaimer now". I guess even if God Himself came down and said "Travoltus did not mean Rape Is Acceptable", there would be atheists who'd not believe.
RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
This is how gender discussions are shut down cold: someone always invokes Godwina.
Oh and just in case I forgot to say it... RAPE IS NOT OKAY. NOBODY WANTS TO BE RAPED.
But guys really would LIKE to be approached more by women. Not that it's likely to happen unless you're on the level of Donald Trump, Wesley Snipes or Richie Ramirez...
Who said anything about RAPE? I said I wasn't condoning it as a way of precluding paranoid people from bringing that IRRELEVANT subject matter up.
Why is it that any time someone talks about reversing the script to where MEN get equal sexual attention, you people have to immediately and reflexively bring up the rape boogeyman out of nowhere AND then dream up the 300 lb syphillis-infected whale scenario??
Are you afraid of what kind of world you'll live in if women become as aggressive about sex as men?
I said I wasn't confoning rape, and now I see tons of responses by people with poor reading comprehension who think I was. You're right, I'm talking about the fact that MOST HETERO SINGLE men would love to wake up to a world where women were OFFERING them sex instead of men always having to throw tons of game and embark on a long adventure just to prove themselves worthy of a woman's attention.
It's frighteningly pathetic to see that so many people think that if women are offering you sex, they MUST be 300lb monsters. You can't even hope to reason with minds like that.
I don't care if some moderator nails me. It's time men started being honest instead of being PC.
When a woman has to sign up for SELECTIVE SERVICE then she can come talk to me about how bad she has it in life. Oh well, women usually outlive men so they have plenty of time to gripe about how their evil oppressors held them down long after their oppressors are dead. I didn't hear women complaining about being given preferential treatment on the Titanic's lifeboats, did anyone else? Yeah, discrimination is evil only when it goes against you, not for you. That's why I'm a humanist, and not a feminist.
As for women whining about being hit on all the time and being stared at? Give me a break and a half. Us men would give our right nut to be treated that way by women. Get paid to have sex? Bring it on! Now, I'm not condoning rape at all, but sheesh, let's look at the cold hard reality here for what it is: if there was a city on Earth where women sneaked into windows and jumped on guys' wangs at night, and where a random walk by an alley was likely to end in a guy being snatched by a gang of sex starved women? Ya damned SKIPPY almost the entire world's male hetero population would immigrate there! That's the stone cold truth. Can I get a witness out there??
Can I get a witness from da crowd??? :D
"Didn't think so. As much as I can recall, all their rebates are applied when you check out. Why do it any other way? Costco has to be one of the most stress free places to shop: they pay and treat their employees well, they sell high quality products at low prices and they have sane, consumer friendly policies."
:D
Stress-free? I dunno about that. Those long lines are heck to wait in. But yeah, I am a member, and I have a relative who LOVES working there. Their prices rock, and their stuff is better quality.
BTW Costco also donates to the Democratic Party... I bet that's a surprise to some...
That was well said.
Maximizing stockholder value at all costs is the theme of laissez-faire policy.
It literally means that if you generate a ton of toxic garbage and you can dump it in someone else's yard without being caught, you have increased your shareholder value by not having to waste resources cleaning up your own mess.
That's called an externality and laissez-faire does not take into account the effects of dumping toxic garbage in someone else's yard. Oh wait, it does take it into account. It says "screw you" to the dumpEE as long as the dumpER has paid his/her due to the politicians and judges ahead of time.
Here's where laissez-faire leads to outright murder and hypocrisy: If someone in the dumpee camp dies and that death is proven to be the dumper's fault, it's called negligence and it leads to some petty fine at worst. If a loved one of the dead person comes back and retaliates, then it's punished as murder.
That is to say, you can intentionally poison the ground that some people live on, and if they die, you aren't criminally prosecuted (under laissez-faire). But if you put out a box of rat poison in someone else's yard and a dog eats it and dies...........
If they're learning CS then you're right. But I think that learning CS at all, is setting people up for a major career crash. The more effort you put into it, the harder you will fall when the fact that East Indians can match you tit for tat for pennies on your dollar, finally catches up: namely, you may have amassed a TON of college debt, only to see your job prospects vanish by the time you even graduate; 5 years later, at the most.
Given that in East India, they can learn absolutely everything that you are teaching and do it for pennies on our dollar, it will inevitably come to pass that there is no need to hire CS grads from America, and thus there'll be no point in teaching computer science in the US any more. This is a matter of when, not if.
If you're a professor, as I said, your profession may be clinging to life now and you may not even be able to see the end up ahead. I can understand thus why a CS professor might say their job is secure. But in this generation, or the next (at the latest), CS professors in America won't be any more necessary than teachers of horse cart production.
That having been said, it is wise not to even get into CS (as you well know, CS enrollment is dropping). It's wise to get into a field where you'll learn how to rent-a-coder.
Namely, the job of the future will involve management - as in, learning how to outsource, not how to program. There aren't too many management jobs to go around, though, and they too will be outsourced, and East Indian companies will do to America's tech companies what Japan is doing to the Big Three automakers now: they will undercut you by price first, then quality second, after which they'll own all your market share, and finally leave you with a billion dollars of losses a year until you finally leave the software business completely.
Of course, I am inviting a major chicken little vs the ostrich debate here, so I'll shut up.
Right, it's in both the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD format specs. But I still don't see where the porn industry anted up in the DRM war any more than they did when they moved from VHS to DVD. Many porn DVDs come out that aren't region encoded (in fact, hardly any are), and a majority of them (*ahem* *hmmmm*) aren't even CSS encrypted. You can copy them right to the hard disk and to another DVD (*sirens*). There's nothing in this article that says porn producers are looking for any kind of DRM - it's just there no matter what they choo-(*door breaking down*)
OMFG ITS THE FEDZ@!#!##!$!!!!
This article appeared to be more along the lines of "Adult Entertainment Antes Up In the HD DVD Format War" than "Adult Entertainment Antes Up In DRM War".
I didn't even see "DRM" or "copy protection/prevention" in the entire article.
Was there another article to this that I missed?