Perhaps. My reference was based upon what I think I know of corporate management's perspective of things - perception and reality don't necessarily coincide.
Because one of the As in RIAA stands for America and America is the colloquial term for the U.S.A. because it's the only country on both American continents to use the word America in its name.
They say if you're old enough, you've seen it all before. If you're older than that, you've forgotten what you've seen. And if you're older than that, you run the risk of forgetting what you've forgotten.
You identify another facet of the phenomena and a very valid one at that.
I meant what I said - so I **am** guilty of being perhaps too narrow or too obscure. Not only can you blame someone (MS specifically, but Apple applies in my analogy) but if the problem is, in fact, big enough then someone will fix it - like a nice third party for malware or a virus or a bad network problem, if MS or Apple doesn't. (And I mean nice in that sentence in the worst possible way!!)
FWIW, I didn't think you were paraphrasing on the part about no one ever getting fired for buying Windows. That was my intent.
I've heard of Last.FM and I have been living on Mars, you insensitive clod!
Oddly enough, even here on Mars, just as in the US, they have a 3-listen limit on any track thanks to the RIAA.
So, three shall be the number of the counting. Thanks CBS, thanks Last.FM and thanks RIAA. In fact, I've said thank you back by turning off the autoscrobbler and reducing the data that you can use to make money off of me.
Speaking for my fellow Martians - you're welcome, Last.FM!
I'd argue that OS X was a unix playground since the public beta - probably because by that time, I was used to pure BSD and pure AT&T UNIX and many, many variants and pre-Novell, pre-SCO and pre-whatever nobuddy I knew gave a toot about certs - so long as we knew how to manage the beast, it was just another nix.
Is it true that this rev is the first to be certified as UNIX? I'll take your word for it.
But certified or not - it's core has always been UNIX. Today Apple gives credit to its FreeBSD heritage, but in the early OS X days they noted the OpenBSD and NetBSD components that were part of the effort. I think that all the hoo-hah has come from the non-BSD kernel being a part of it all.
Even if it had had a BSD kernel, I don't think it would stop unintelligent or uniformed opinions about OS X. Non-unix guys and non-OS X experienced guys don't get that in the early OS X days, many of us would run an X desktop in addition to our Aqua desktops (many of the tools for that have fallen by my wayside) and unless you were doing kernel mods or kernel programming, it was indistinguishable from BSD. When fink came out, one guy I corresponded with regularly at the Apple form posted his Gnome desktop running on his Mac.
Your link was for OS X server. For those that don't know, simply install the BSD subsystem and devel tools with the desktop version and you get X and gcc and from there, just about anything useful that you might like.
By 10.0, you could finagle NetInfo to manage your desktop as an NFS server and many other server tasks. As memory serves, the Apple mods removed my instructions on how to do that from the Apple forums. Can't say I blamed them - the guys that could wrench a desktop rev into a server rev didn't my advice and the guys that did were prolly better off paying for the server and getting Apple support (that group being mutually exclusive to those that were comfortable running a free nix server in the first place).
There is nothing in principle wrong with "movie style ratings" for sites.
Absolutely and completely incorrect.
To begin, look at the premise of movie style ratings and what's wrong there: 1. Pre-code movies are more realistic w.r.t. interpersonal and social interactions and - for me - more interesting and entertaining. 2. The movie code led to nothing more nor less than political oversight of Hollywood. 3. The modern movie ratings system (an outgrowth of the code) has destroyed many a good indie film's chances of recouping costs - there have been a number of decent shows on the IFC (Independent Film Channel) detailing this. 4. The ratings themselves are set by people whose values and reasoning make me wretch (again, I refer to interviews with them in the aforementioned shows on the IFC). I would urge you to really think about who will set these ratings of which you speak - and to further think about the criteria. 5. Anecdotally, I watched the original Jurassic Park sitting next to someone else's 5 year-old kids while they were being mentally numbed by the raptors ripping living human limb from limb - raised to be as slack-jawed as their parents.
Movie ratings don't work at all - therefore, there is no principle for you to apply.
When theory and data disagree, you validate the data and when proven valid, you throw out the theory and start over.
You're taking what appears to be a measured argument on this subject, but your premise is completely screwed up - that the ratings themselves will be fair (whatever that means!!!!) or fairly applied (whatever that means!!!!) or will be rational in the first place.
All that your support will accomplish is a dilution of quality and a growth area for narrowly-focused political interests to become the middle layer in yet another immoral currency exchange.
History has proven this with the movie ratings - and they got away with it because the back-end arguments **sound reasonable**.
When the front end is drek, the back end is, too.
All I'd have to do to kill a competitor's website with a G rating - and a comment space - is to constantly hound the comment space with X-rated remarks and report the site to the "authorities." Think it wouldn't work? Sure it would. The door is then open to regulate all blogs with higher "standands" than non-interactive sites.
The whole idea for rating web sites is just so wrong on so many levels that I don't know where to begin - or stop - so I stop here.
It's just that there a LOT of posts complaining that if this were to happen with an MS update, the Apple gang would be crucifying them and a lot of negativity that this is funny.
Mismanaged updates by either corporation - Apple or MS - is indefensible and inexcusable, and it's usually a real problem for the victims.
The occasional screwed-up update from Apple is something Apple users are - unfortunately - used to experiencing. Ditto for the MS users. Given that I'm a user of both, that's just my experience.
I think we excuse Linux problems (I'm a user of that, too) because the software was free. There's some merit to that, but as I think about that statement it does make me ponder... In any case, the real demerits of the OS choices are overlooked at times like this:
1. Linux not liked because no corporation stands behind the OS potentially misbehaving. This is a real problem in the minds of many corporate managers who have to oversee risk.
2. OS X is the "odd man out" where corp mgrs don't want that risk.
3. MS may obsolesce something that worked for the whole organization in favor of something that seems to work less well, another risk issue for corp mgrs.
The fact that an update involving any of the three might screw something up is neither a decision-point nor cause for immature glee.
The problem from TFA is an unfortunate and foreseeable consequence of testing getting the short-shrift.
I've been using OS X since the public beta. I used to auto-update. Now I wait. It is not a fear of the unknown - it is, sadly, a fear of the known.
I was one of the guinea pigs who figured out how to resurrect a Mac from a bad update several years ago. In that case, it was screwed up permissions, AFAIR.
Ever since then, I wait. I'm not feeling guilty making others the guinea pigs - maybe I should, but I don't. I wait because there was ONE update that was recalled and anyone who applied it on day one (it only lasted that day) needed an Apple store or a second Apple to fix the problem.
Apple's behavior w.r.t. testing updates is indefensible and unbearable - but once burned is twice shy.
My wait is **about** a week, unless I forget that I parked the SW Update window, then sometimes it's longer - or unless it's security-related - I usually wait about a day or two before installing those.
As to your greater point:
There is another guy who I work with that likes to pull this BS out of the air all the time when a new release comes out.
Yep - I agree, total nonsense. I've worked with guys like that. Complete PITA to eventually bring their machines up to date with the rest - especially when you stop to help to debug a non-problem, i.e., one that's a symptom of some problem already addressed in a previous update. I could never get them to understand that the reason they couldn't find their problem/symptom via google was that maybe everyone else had already updated and that one finds **trends** on google, not tails or outlyers. And my experience matches yours - that behavior costs the business real money.
My point was that $15/hour was that the parent had established this as the fair and correct wage. Where my sister worked, $25/hour painters were getting replaced by $15/hour newcomers. I find the rate unfair. That was in a GM/UAW plant. (One of my kids got more than that starting out as a house painter.)
Have you worked in an auto factory? I'd like to know to know where you got the idea that parts are painted mindlessly. All factory work is drudgery. I'd like to see you paint things on forced overtime and have it come out even.
As for skilled vs. unskilled classifications - the point was the complaint of $50-$70/hour vs. "skilled" with 20 years seniority getting actually less than $30/hour. The difference to get up to $50-70/hour is accountancy, not necessarily reality.
Thanks, but I'm well-acquainted with the real world.
If it is inbuilt and not a cultural difference perhaps it is possible to extrapolate an idealised design of an object people will perceive as 'valuable'.
I believe we call very close approximations to this ideal "art."
Just because a few computer companies started out as projects, that does not mean that everything someone starts in their garage is bound to be wildly successfull. I dont get why they must draw the parallels.
Correct, but more to the point it's all about confusing causality.
MOST endeavors start out at someone's home, be it garage, basement. AFTER determining or discovering economic feasibility, it branches into traditional brick and mortar.
VC startups are not excluded from that statement - the original proposal or draft prospectus is often drafted on a laptop at someone's kitchen table. (I made this fact up from reading of one VC startup some years ago.) If you add in Starbucks as an extension of the den or kitchen in the previous statement (now accepted as gospel truth because it's referenced, even if only by me), then that just about sums it up.
It's all about causality and co-incidence (note how I broke the word apart). The price of bananas skyrocketing in the great depression was not the cause of the depression - everything skyrocketed in price.
Starting off at home is a COncurrent incident of starting off. Nothing more.
Years back, we were agog with the quality of images - depth, detail - from synthetic aperture radar. Visible-spectrum processing is very cool and very different than radar, but what new problem is really being solved here?
I'm not trolling, I'm seriously asking. Hundreds of pulse returns per second to a vehicle in flight (where the pulses themselves provide the shadowing) as opposed to three passive returns of separately-sourced shadowing.... I'm just not getting the improvement from a conceptual point of view (no pun intended).
My sister worked for a closing GM plant - and just got laid off. Worked there for over 20 years and her job is union-classified as skilled. Her particular job is being bandied about in the media as paying $71/hour. She gets a bit over a third of that, GROSS, not net. Her pension funding is going south - because they fund more by contingency than by trust accounting, I suppose (I am not an expert).
Now her friends and neighbors are giving her the same $71/hour shit.
You can pontificate about unions all you want - and you do - but you have no idea what you're talking about.
It's not the unions that destroyed the auto industry - it's that the entire industry, like so many others in the world today (and the US especially) are really run by the accountants and/or driven by accounting practices, with "professional" managers or promoted salesmen believing that they know crap about the ramifications of their decisions.
By the way - if any company you've worked for bills your time at less than a multiple of about 2.5 on your salary, then they're losing money.
Yes, pensions, 401ks, insurance, employer's portion of social security, compliance with unemployment and disability laws - those all come for free in your world, as do power, etc, etc. And if you think for one minute that those things aren't being "creatively" managed on the books and they aren't added into inflated labor reports - in short, if you think you know thing one about accountancy in the auto industry you're delusional.
That's just my friendly opinion.
You are correct in much of the over-specialization and waste that are union-caused. But that was the insane result of insane management forcing people (under threat of firing) of doing dangerous jobs requiring skill. It may not excuse what the union response was, but the simple fact is that what goes around, comes around.
And I close by criticizing your decision that a painter should get $15/hour. I don't know if you got that number along with the flying monkeys or not, but frankly - that amount does nothing to compete against a lot of jobs whose end products are in lower demand and carry lower costs than automobiles.
Take a course in economics and work in the real world for a while. You clearly have some idea of auto-manufacturing ops - but little else in what you postulate is even close to reality.
It's not just objectivity - it should also be about insight, intelligence and analysis. My personal citation - Edward R. Murrow. (The irony that he was a broadcast journalist is not lost on me.)
Got a new political or skulduggery scandal? Add a "-gate" suffix to it. Great. No intelligence there whatsoever. Woodward and Bernstein WORKED for their insights. Now I see/read/hear yearly about a "-gate" with no effort by the reporter, yet - what is it? - in their minds they're the new W&B?
Dan Rather became popular - IMO - or for me at least - because he was the young reporter always calling Nixon to task during Nixon's press conferences - and getting it right.
Later, in the 1991 Gulf War, Rather said, and I quote from memory - "the F-15E - the E is for Eagle - blah blah blah." Ludicrous. I would want to fault Rather's intelligence, but it may have been the whole broadcast journalistic system that led to someone feeding him that nonsense into his earpiece for him to parrot.
I've talked to reporters, socially - a LOT of them. They have one thing in common and that's a general "I'm going to trick you" or "I'm smarter than you" attitude. That's my experience anyways. Unlike their better predecessors, they aren't smarter and they don't think things through.
Short attention span thinking does not lead to incisive reporting.
The AC parent is 100% correct. No way, shape or form is this a free speech issue. It's an advertising issue. A few decades ago, we had a small shop and did a bulk mailing to our neighborhood. We got a bulk rate from the post office - and we paid it. It was a cordial mailing, generated business and goodwill.
That method still exists - but it costs spammers money. TF bad for them and boo hoo!
Political emails and so forth are NOT freedom of speech - they're fucking spam. You want to BROADCAST your message? You get a web site. You pay other web sites to advertise for yours. Just like one TV show is advertised during another.
Any hijacking of any medium from its intended purpose is SPAM. It's really simple.
Please mod parent up - about +1E5, Right On! should just about do it.
PPS - For those getting free email - many providers have it backwards!!!! Who remembers Juno? It was free email. The ads came to you, the USER, until/unless you paid. The ads did NOT go out at the bottom as footers, fer crying out loud.
But he (Hockenberry) warns that pricing issues are choking off innovation and could prevent development of an app that could do for the iPhone what the spreadsheet did for the Apple II or desktop publishing did for the Mac.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps. My reference was based upon what I think I know of corporate management's perspective of things - perception and reality don't necessarily coincide.
Because one of the As in RIAA stands for America and America is the colloquial term for the U.S.A. because it's the only country on both American continents to use the word America in its name.
http://www.riaa.com/aboutus.php
Don't you think that if that could find a way to expand their money grubbing, they would?
I think it was all stolen from the Canaanites. Unless we consider that the Canaanites usurped it from the Sumerians.
Land grabs - sorry to be cynical, but that's just the sad busyness-as-usual for the human race.
As opposed to non-greedy patent troll?
For patent trolls, every day is Fools Day!
Geez - I'd forgotten all about that!!
They say if you're old enough, you've seen it all before. If you're older than that, you've forgotten what you've seen. And if you're older than that, you run the risk of forgetting what you've forgotten.
Many thanks for the clarification.
We should all agree not to preview for the time being, lest sourceforge get sued.
Goo didea!
The travesty being that Lotus was using the art developed by VisiCalc.
You identify another facet of the phenomena and a very valid one at that.
I meant what I said - so I **am** guilty of being perhaps too narrow or too obscure. Not only can you blame someone (MS specifically, but Apple applies in my analogy) but if the problem is, in fact, big enough then someone will fix it - like a nice third party for malware or a virus or a bad network problem, if MS or Apple doesn't. (And I mean nice in that sentence in the worst possible way!!)
FWIW, I didn't think you were paraphrasing on the part about no one ever getting fired for buying Windows. That was my intent.
I've heard of Last.FM and I have been living on Mars, you insensitive clod!
Oddly enough, even here on Mars, just as in the US, they have a 3-listen limit on any track thanks to the RIAA.
So, three shall be the number of the counting. Thanks CBS, thanks Last.FM and thanks RIAA. In fact, I've said thank you back by turning off the autoscrobbler and reducing the data that you can use to make money off of me.
Speaking for my fellow Martians - you're welcome, Last.FM!
I'd argue that OS X was a unix playground since the public beta - probably because by that time, I was used to pure BSD and pure AT&T UNIX and many, many variants and pre-Novell, pre-SCO and pre-whatever nobuddy I knew gave a toot about certs - so long as we knew how to manage the beast, it was just another nix.
Is it true that this rev is the first to be certified as UNIX? I'll take your word for it.
But certified or not - it's core has always been UNIX. Today Apple gives credit to its FreeBSD heritage, but in the early OS X days they noted the OpenBSD and NetBSD components that were part of the effort. I think that all the hoo-hah has come from the non-BSD kernel being a part of it all.
Even if it had had a BSD kernel, I don't think it would stop unintelligent or uniformed opinions about OS X. Non-unix guys and non-OS X experienced guys don't get that in the early OS X days, many of us would run an X desktop in addition to our Aqua desktops (many of the tools for that have fallen by my wayside) and unless you were doing kernel mods or kernel programming, it was indistinguishable from BSD. When fink came out, one guy I corresponded with regularly at the Apple form posted his Gnome desktop running on his Mac.
Your link was for OS X server. For those that don't know, simply install the BSD subsystem and devel tools with the desktop version and you get X and gcc and from there, just about anything useful that you might like.
By 10.0, you could finagle NetInfo to manage your desktop as an NFS server and many other server tasks. As memory serves, the Apple mods removed my instructions on how to do that from the Apple forums. Can't say I blamed them - the guys that could wrench a desktop rev into a server rev didn't my advice and the guys that did were prolly better off paying for the server and getting Apple support (that group being mutually exclusive to those that were comfortable running a free nix server in the first place).
I don't really have a point, so I'll stop. :)
There is nothing in principle wrong with "movie style ratings" for sites.
Absolutely and completely incorrect.
To begin, look at the premise of movie style ratings and what's wrong there:
1. Pre-code movies are more realistic w.r.t. interpersonal and social interactions and - for me - more interesting and entertaining.
2. The movie code led to nothing more nor less than political oversight of Hollywood.
3. The modern movie ratings system (an outgrowth of the code) has destroyed many a good indie film's chances of recouping costs - there have been a number of decent shows on the IFC (Independent Film Channel) detailing this.
4. The ratings themselves are set by people whose values and reasoning make me wretch (again, I refer to interviews with them in the aforementioned shows on the IFC). I would urge you to really think about who will set these ratings of which you speak - and to further think about the criteria.
5. Anecdotally, I watched the original Jurassic Park sitting next to someone else's 5 year-old kids while they were being mentally numbed by the raptors ripping living human limb from limb - raised to be as slack-jawed as their parents.
Movie ratings don't work at all - therefore, there is no principle for you to apply.
When theory and data disagree, you validate the data and when proven valid, you throw out the theory and start over.
You're taking what appears to be a measured argument on this subject, but your premise is completely screwed up - that the ratings themselves will be fair (whatever that means!!!!) or fairly applied (whatever that means!!!!) or will be rational in the first place.
All that your support will accomplish is a dilution of quality and a growth area for narrowly-focused political interests to become the middle layer in yet another immoral currency exchange.
History has proven this with the movie ratings - and they got away with it because the back-end arguments **sound reasonable**.
When the front end is drek, the back end is, too.
All I'd have to do to kill a competitor's website with a G rating - and a comment space - is to constantly hound the comment space with X-rated remarks and report the site to the "authorities." Think it wouldn't work? Sure it would. The door is then open to regulate all blogs with higher "standands" than non-interactive sites.
The whole idea for rating web sites is just so wrong on so many levels that I don't know where to begin - or stop - so I stop here.
No, I'm not new here.
Neither am I trolling, neither is this flamebait.
It's just that there a LOT of posts complaining that if this were to happen with an MS update, the Apple gang would be crucifying them and a lot of negativity that this is funny.
Mismanaged updates by either corporation - Apple or MS - is indefensible and inexcusable, and it's usually a real problem for the victims.
The occasional screwed-up update from Apple is something Apple users are - unfortunately - used to experiencing. Ditto for the MS users. Given that I'm a user of both, that's just my experience.
I think we excuse Linux problems (I'm a user of that, too) because the software was free. There's some merit to that, but as I think about that statement it does make me ponder... In any case, the real demerits of the OS choices are overlooked at times like this:
1. Linux not liked because no corporation stands behind the OS potentially misbehaving. This is a real problem in the minds of many corporate managers who have to oversee risk.
2. OS X is the "odd man out" where corp mgrs don't want that risk.
3. MS may obsolesce something that worked for the whole organization in favor of something that seems to work less well, another risk issue for corp mgrs.
The fact that an update involving any of the three might screw something up is neither a decision-point nor cause for immature glee.
The problem from TFA is an unfortunate and foreseeable consequence of testing getting the short-shrift.
This is your fear of the unknown.
I've been using OS X since the public beta. I used to auto-update. Now I wait. It is not a fear of the unknown - it is, sadly, a fear of the known.
I was one of the guinea pigs who figured out how to resurrect a Mac from a bad update several years ago. In that case, it was screwed up permissions, AFAIR.
Ever since then, I wait. I'm not feeling guilty making others the guinea pigs - maybe I should, but I don't. I wait because there was ONE update that was recalled and anyone who applied it on day one (it only lasted that day) needed an Apple store or a second Apple to fix the problem.
Apple's behavior w.r.t. testing updates is indefensible and unbearable - but once burned is twice shy.
My wait is **about** a week, unless I forget that I parked the SW Update window, then sometimes it's longer - or unless it's security-related - I usually wait about a day or two before installing those.
As to your greater point:
There is another guy who I work with that likes to pull this BS out of the air all the time when a new release comes out.
Yep - I agree, total nonsense. I've worked with guys like that. Complete PITA to eventually bring their machines up to date with the rest - especially when you stop to help to debug a non-problem, i.e., one that's a symptom of some problem already addressed in a previous update. I could never get them to understand that the reason they couldn't find their problem/symptom via google was that maybe everyone else had already updated and that one finds **trends** on google, not tails or outlyers. And my experience matches yours - that behavior costs the business real money.
My point was that $15/hour was that the parent had established this as the fair and correct wage. Where my sister worked, $25/hour painters were getting replaced by $15/hour newcomers. I find the rate unfair. That was in a GM/UAW plant. (One of my kids got more than that starting out as a house painter.)
Have you worked in an auto factory? I'd like to know to know where you got the idea that parts are painted mindlessly. All factory work is drudgery. I'd like to see you paint things on forced overtime and have it come out even.
As for skilled vs. unskilled classifications - the point was the complaint of $50-$70/hour vs. "skilled" with 20 years seniority getting actually less than $30/hour. The difference to get up to $50-70/hour is accountancy, not necessarily reality.
Thanks, but I'm well-acquainted with the real world.
If it is inbuilt and not a cultural difference perhaps it is possible to extrapolate an idealised design of an object people will perceive as 'valuable'.
I believe we call very close approximations to this ideal "art."
Just because a few computer companies started out as projects, that does not mean that everything someone starts in their garage is bound to be wildly successfull. I dont get why they must draw the parallels.
Correct, but more to the point it's all about confusing causality.
MOST endeavors start out at someone's home, be it garage, basement. AFTER determining or discovering economic feasibility, it branches into traditional brick and mortar.
VC startups are not excluded from that statement - the original proposal or draft prospectus is often drafted on a laptop at someone's kitchen table. (I made this fact up from reading of one VC startup some years ago.) If you add in Starbucks as an extension of the den or kitchen in the previous statement (now accepted as gospel truth because it's referenced, even if only by me), then that just about sums it up.
It's all about causality and co-incidence (note how I broke the word apart). The price of bananas skyrocketing in the great depression was not the cause of the depression - everything skyrocketed in price.
Starting off at home is a COncurrent incident of starting off. Nothing more.
Years back, we were agog with the quality of images - depth, detail - from synthetic aperture radar. Visible-spectrum processing is very cool and very different than radar, but what new problem is really being solved here?
I'm not trolling, I'm seriously asking. Hundreds of pulse returns per second to a vehicle in flight (where the pulses themselves provide the shadowing) as opposed to three passive returns of separately-sourced shadowing.... I'm just not getting the improvement from a conceptual point of view (no pun intended).
For those unfamiliar, here's a good starting point: http://southport.jpl.nasa.gov/
I repeat - I appreciate the tech here is cool, but where's the application improvement? Thanks in advance for helping me to understand...
Now, a better idea would be to have a separate solar panel module that you can unfold and plug into your laptop.
Make that sucker a tight-fitting hat with a foil lining and you've really got something!!!!
My sister worked for a closing GM plant - and just got laid off. Worked there for over 20 years and her job is union-classified as skilled. Her particular job is being bandied about in the media as paying $71/hour. She gets a bit over a third of that, GROSS, not net. Her pension funding is going south - because they fund more by contingency than by trust accounting, I suppose (I am not an expert).
Now her friends and neighbors are giving her the same $71/hour shit.
You can pontificate about unions all you want - and you do - but you have no idea what you're talking about.
It's not the unions that destroyed the auto industry - it's that the entire industry, like so many others in the world today (and the US especially) are really run by the accountants and/or driven by accounting practices, with "professional" managers or promoted salesmen believing that they know crap about the ramifications of their decisions.
By the way - if any company you've worked for bills your time at less than a multiple of about 2.5 on your salary, then they're losing money.
Yes, pensions, 401ks, insurance, employer's portion of social security, compliance with unemployment and disability laws - those all come for free in your world, as do power, etc, etc. And if you think for one minute that those things aren't being "creatively" managed on the books and they aren't added into inflated labor reports - in short, if you think you know thing one about accountancy in the auto industry you're delusional.
That's just my friendly opinion.
You are correct in much of the over-specialization and waste that are union-caused. But that was the insane result of insane management forcing people (under threat of firing) of doing dangerous jobs requiring skill. It may not excuse what the union response was, but the simple fact is that what goes around, comes around.
And I close by criticizing your decision that a painter should get $15/hour. I don't know if you got that number along with the flying monkeys or not, but frankly - that amount does nothing to compete against a lot of jobs whose end products are in lower demand and carry lower costs than automobiles.
Take a course in economics and work in the real world for a while. You clearly have some idea of auto-manufacturing ops - but little else in what you postulate is even close to reality.
It's not just objectivity - it should also be about insight, intelligence and analysis. My personal citation - Edward R. Murrow. (The irony that he was a broadcast journalist is not lost on me.)
Got a new political or skulduggery scandal? Add a "-gate" suffix to it. Great. No intelligence there whatsoever. Woodward and Bernstein WORKED for their insights. Now I see/read/hear yearly about a "-gate" with no effort by the reporter, yet - what is it? - in their minds they're the new W&B?
Dan Rather became popular - IMO - or for me at least - because he was the young reporter always calling Nixon to task during Nixon's press conferences - and getting it right.
Later, in the 1991 Gulf War, Rather said, and I quote from memory - "the F-15E - the E is for Eagle - blah blah blah." Ludicrous. I would want to fault Rather's intelligence, but it may have been the whole broadcast journalistic system that led to someone feeding him that nonsense into his earpiece for him to parrot.
I've talked to reporters, socially - a LOT of them. They have one thing in common and that's a general "I'm going to trick you" or "I'm smarter than you" attitude. That's my experience anyways. Unlike their better predecessors, they aren't smarter and they don't think things through.
Short attention span thinking does not lead to incisive reporting.
Email is a recipient pays system.
The AC parent is 100% correct. No way, shape or form is this a free speech issue. It's an advertising issue. A few decades ago, we had a small shop and did a bulk mailing to our neighborhood. We got a bulk rate from the post office - and we paid it. It was a cordial mailing, generated business and goodwill.
That method still exists - but it costs spammers money. TF bad for them and boo hoo!
Political emails and so forth are NOT freedom of speech - they're fucking spam. You want to BROADCAST your message? You get a web site. You pay other web sites to advertise for yours. Just like one TV show is advertised during another.
Any hijacking of any medium from its intended purpose is SPAM. It's really simple.
Please mod parent up - about +1E5, Right On! should just about do it.
PPS - For those getting free email - many providers have it backwards!!!! Who remembers Juno? It was free email. The ads came to you, the USER, until/unless you paid. The ads did NOT go out at the bottom as footers, fer crying out loud.
Notice how I conveniently redefined idiot as someone who doesn't understand Babylon 5.
I noticed that and I'm confused - why was it you redefined moron as idiot?
First, there will be no Cyborg Steve.
There will, however, be an iBorg Steve.
Second, you have just opened yourself up to Apple's legal muscle by letting the iCat out of the iBag regarding the iBorg. Are you iNsane?!?
Correct - the summary is wrong, TFA is correct -
But he (Hockenberry) warns that pricing issues are choking off innovation and could prevent development of an app that could do for the iPhone what the spreadsheet did for the Apple II or desktop publishing did for the Mac.