Any system can be cheated somehow, given enough motivation to cheat. The big point is how easy it is to cheat ! There's no reason to make a system weaker because the -supposed- future order of difference is one or two points. It smells of apathic depressed behavior, exactly how many politicians would like us to be, apathic and careless.
Maybe you remember the first times newspaper started talking about the "evil computer pirates" (then "hackers" , then "black hat" then god know what they invented) and how they exploited banks' computers.
Remember how people was -totally stunned- by the fact one person could steal millions without actually robbing a bank ? It was fuckinbelievable, yet it was 100% true, it could be done without a trace or a smoking gun. TODAY security is much tighter in many financial systems thanks to hackers exposing or exploiting the loopholes.
So why should we TODAY make the voting system even more cheatable ? We know that computers can be used to manipulate millions of votes in a split second, so for what goddammed reason are we throwing ourself in a predicatable and predicted disaster , with all our past experience with computer abuses ?
That of course implies that you were warned in advance of the fact that you're being tracked and that the tracking method doesn't pose any safety hazard to you.
For instace I know it's unpratical but I could track you by spraying you with a radioactive agent..pretty much impossible to disable..or I could use a miniaturized cell phone sending realtime data about your location while disabling your pacemaker.
The point being, if you wanna interact with me on your property you have to insure my safety..a blanket "warning: any imagineable, possible and unpossible danger is only your responsability" implies that I can, for instance, enter your property riding an M1A1 Abrams to insure my safety.
healthcare and education may not be part of human rights on the paper, but they should be as they are in reality services you can't really do without.
Healthcare..tell me how are you supposed to work while you're being cured ? What if you worked your ass off but you still don't have money to pay for your healthcare because there was a price hike ? What if you didn't smoke or drink or have a reckless behavior and got sick nonetheless ? What if the insurance scams you and you don't have money to pay the lawyer to fight em ?
Education..you wanna remain a brute ? Look at the situation in any piss poor country with poor education..they're practically slaves of anybody who knows more then them. Also, lack of education makes them easier targets for religious zealots, you want to have more terrorists ?
And I won't ever bother comment about what you think you know about taxation. Everyone should share the burned equally, but they're not to be equallty educated or they health shouldn't equally be taken care of. I see, some people is more equal then others....
We're an indipendent group of capitalistic oriented advisers. Our job is to provide companies facing problems with old business models recycle their old business models in previously unaffected markets. We are aware of your user problems, which also affect many other industries in which the business model was that of selling "content" with considerable to enormous profits at reasonably low production costs.
While you were selling cars your customers learned that it was possible to bring more people in the same car or borrow the car, therefore reducing your sales of "content". Let us enlighten you that what you was really selling was the ability to move at a comparatively cheaper price without relying on anybody else, in other words "your content". The utter inefficiency of public transport that you so wisely acted to undercut favoured your business plan, but unfortunately your customeres developed more efficient alternatives, car pooling and hitchhiking friends and started employing open transporation initiatives. Your shifting the risks on them by making them accountable for almost any car accident did wonders, but lawsuits for construction defects are an increasing concern.
We suggest you to convert your business to another "content" level ; you could sell ability to use cars by taking stakes in "gasoline" content or "electricity" or "motor oil". Alternatively you could lobby hard with our help to change the freeway system into a toll-road system, as security costs will increase with the advent of terrorism.
Other industries are converting from providing "content" to providing "access to content". Because of the extremely low cost of production of
very low quality content (as you know more quantity doesn't imply better quality, but often dilution of investment) which appears to general public as "more choice" it is far more profiteable to sell access to content by taxing the user at the access point, for instance by Transportation Rights Management or by charging the customer a fixed price "all you can eat" access to low quality productions, an higher price for higher quality.
Even better,you could charge for -using the tools- needed to access whatever content, but this will require more synchronization with other industries. With our help we're sure will find a way to restore your business model in the future, by changing the look of everything without really changing nothing.
And yes, everybody will admit your right.
By reading this message you agree to subject yourself to a regressive, pro-forma economic system.
Well thanks for revealing the criminals you're armed and dangerous. If I was a criminal, I wouldn't think twice about first shooting you and then evaluate if it was worth the bullet. Safety first and after all you don't expect the criminal to come so he's got the tactical advantage of surprise.
Your gun is useful only if the attacker is unarmed or if you see him first, but for some reason some gun owner believes he's the only one who is smart and prepared. Talk about daydreaming.
Because I felt like I wanted my car tuned up to maintain good performance over time ; treat any machine well and it will bring you anywhere.
The technician was happy to do the cleaning job that he knew well, he was paid for and did a good job. My car felt like new, no Ferrari but hey it was a tune up not a modification ! While I was waiting a car salesman approached me, proposing me to trade in the old car for a brand new one, offering a good deal. I refused as I went in for a tune up and I didn't want to give up a perfectly good car that was OK for my needs.
The car salesman didn't pressure me much, I later realized. After like a week of traveling I noticed a noise I had never noticed before..kaching..kaching..kaching. Little, but persistant.
I was a little alarmed, but the car didn't seem to behave badly. I didn't want to run in trouble, so I went back to the mechanic. The technician said he didn't know, and asked his coworkers..meanwhile the car salesman said that he knew, it was a structural defect of some pump and that to save me time and expenses he would have replaced it for little money. That "kaching" was typical of the problem, which was little known but to insiders.
I said I would have tought about that, and I went to another mechanic, who didn't know..but promised me to spend some time thinking about it. The day after he discovered it was just a loose part not fixed well after the tuneup.
Kaching...you need new hardware or the world will fall apart...kaching..it's a big problem, we don't want you in harm.
I wish that reality was so clear cut and easy, but it sounds much more like a Walmart public relations (read propaganda) statement then reality.
In 2003, out of a 229 Billion USD net sales made a 8 Billion USD net profit (after taxes). The operating cost was near 39 Billion USD which includes the cost of workforce , around 1 Million 500 thousand employees worldwide..which means that after paying wages and other workforce costs Walmart makes an average of 5300 USD net profit for each employee they have and they have lots.
Also, if we consider the 39 Billions USD operating and sales costs as entirely made of wages received by employees (but they're not ! as they include other costs) and divide by 1.5M employees that would mean that on average each employee would cost 26000 USD a year ; considering 8 hours work a day for 300 days a year that'd make a theoretical wage of nearly 10 USD per hour per employee before taxes and it's even lower if they pull free extra hours.
But that 39 Billlion include also operating, administrative and other many cost streams which are not detailed into consolidated statement, it's not entirely wages to workers..so my guess (without further data) is that the average wage is probably around 6-5 USD per hour.
A grim outlook for workers indeed and for governments supplementing their minimal incomes.
While mom & pop store cannot command lower goods price at wholesale, it seems Walrmart isn't so good at commanding low prices as the the cost of stuff being bought was around 190 Billion if my memory serves ; a big mom and pop store in which guess who gets screwed the most ? The store boy.
From Merriam Webster definition of censorship: the institution, system, or practice of censoring and the definition of censoring: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable
Now in this case I fail to see any government censorship on these stories, but that doesn't imply other entities didn't choose to censor some story. Indeed the editors of any publication have censoring powers (by the mean of not publishing what some call hysterical crap, others call uncomfortable articles) unless when they allow almost complete freedom of choice to their journalist , retaining the power to refuse to publish an article at the price of starting an internal conflict with the journalists.
From the project website, in the "About" section we read:
Project Censored compiles an annual list of 25 news stories of social significance that have been overlooked, under-reported or self-censored by the country's major national news media.
Quite clearly they're referring to a generic entity known as "major national news media" which, they feel, should have published the articles they deem to be of the utmost importance.
That's exactly what some people out there do when they blame "the liberal media" for almost anything wrong under the sun , while the projects does blame generic major media for underreporting stories. Perfectly fine with me, as nobody is forced to believe whatever the "anti-liberal media" people say as well as whatever the project says.
NRA would probably send you an horse head in your bed as a present because your description of the problems applies perfectly to hand held weapons.
Maybe 99.9% of firearms are not used to kill humans , yet that 0.01% could be one man or one thousand depending on the numbers. Something must therefore be done as killing is a serious problem, much more important then copyright infringments unless you value copyright more then human life, which I seriously hope you don't.
So in a knee jerk reaction we could, quite simply, choose a radical solution and outlaw production and sales of guns as this network of death must be shut down. To avoid this solution, traceability and responsability must either go to the firearm producer or to the user, or to both to alleviate the weight (if possible).
If we shut down Kazaa, which has legitimate uses, then we must literally raze any weapon building manufacturer today as the latter is far far more dangerous then filesharing tools.
if you are salaried, then anything you invent duing your job tenure that is reasonably related to your job desciption should be the company's property
Most employers are perfectly willing to give exemptions for unrelated stuff, they just would prefer not to get screwed, and a blanket clause in the contract is the fastest way to prevent that
I think this is complete bullshit ; while it appears to be a preventive clause, protecting from employees stealing concepts the company didn't patent (and why didn't the company patent it, are they lazy or what ?) I think it is just a clause some companies want to use to take ideas from employees for free without taking the burden of proving it was a company developed concept.
For instace if I join a company and while I work over there I see a number of problems related to something the company is working on and I find a solution (which is what any company is looking for) there's no contribution from the company, it's a work I did, not the company. So why should they get it for free, on the presumption I somehow "stole it" ?
1. The majority of companies that operate in your field of work choose to apply the "I own your inventions" provision as standard in contracts.
2. But you oppose it, on the reasonable grounds that
a)being employed in one company doesn't imply that the company helped develop/conceive the idea even if the product is sold in the same market.
b)the burden of proof of misappropriation should be on the company, there shouldn't be a burden on inventor who patented the idea, as he's potentially disclosing the idea to the world by patenting it.
3. Therefore, you find yourself out of 80-100% of your job's market and are indirectly forced to get another job, at least until you find some better company in your field (which may never happen)
I can't think of anything more chilling to innovation and invention then a provision that says "everything you haven't disclosed to us before is likely to be ours" ; who in his right mind would ever -think- about inventing something in his field of works, knowing that a previous employer may sue the hell out of him and win, only because of the amount of money they have and the amount you don't ?
Dude I think you are leaving one utopia (government does all) to join another utopia (free market does all).
As a matter of fact there is no necessary implication between the presence of a unrestricted market and the presence of goods that 1. are necessary to live or 2. are appreciated and demanded by almost everyone in the population.
In other words, one may have free market (really free market, based on strict respect of rules of competition) and have conditions which are _as bad_ as that offered by a totalitarian centralized economy runned by a government.
That CAN happen when the competition isn't really unrestricted and when pre-conditions of the free market theory aren't met ; this outcome is the most likely to happen, as the pre-conditions set by free market theory are as well-defined as completely utopian.
In my opinion, we shouldn't look at who's providing the goods, but at how the goods are actually invented and produced : we should concentrate on technological innovation, which is REAL engine behind the presence of today advanced goods and the possibility of producing loads of these goods to satisfy wider demands.
In other words: it's not "market" or "government" providing us with the GOODS we want or need : it is technology at service of illuministic and democratic ideals and concepts like these of individual inalienable rights, human rights, individual freedom and cooperation to achieve common interests. It's the people actually thinking, inventing and producing things with the goal of making them avaiable in a sustainable way to the largest possible population.
Yeah you probably would pay because you experienced broadband and can't fall back to dialup but for a fee weeks. But people not used to broadband are less likely to experience the withdrawl effects:)..so marketers must induce it in the middleofnowhere population..a $500 introductory fee would probably act more as a disincentive then a incentive.
High speed download access , but DSL (at best) upload access. So yeah it's cool, good for people in remote places without DSL/Cable access..but I wonder who will pay the alleged $500 upfront cost in rural areas.....
Oh wait, Porn ! Ahhh if only research against cancer was half as popular.
Eh I like common sense:) Too bad if anybody uses common sense too much you end up with botulin in your common-sense-level sterilized jars.
Oh and the meteor is indeed heated to thousand degrees during entry phase, but not necessarily uniformly heated. Think about the Space Shuttle..if it was uniformly heated at the temperature of the heat shield you'd have a bunch of unhappy vaporized astronauts ; fortunately that doesn't happen (unless you have an hole in the wing).
So yeah it is in theory possible for some lifeform to enter the planet by hitchhiking some meteor. I'll declare a War on Illegal Aliens asap.
Complex Formula Not Complex Formula Takes t>30'| (x+y)^2=(x^2+y^2+2xy) | x^(-1)=1/x Takes t<30'| ln(e^x)=x | 2x2
If you can understand what's wrong with the matrix above, you don't need to read that book. If you can't, you need to understand the stuff above before reading that book.
Well dude I guess people may be stupid, but if they're stupid enough not to make a CROSS on a piece of paper I don't know how they'll be able to push the exact area on a touch screen. Maybe youngers will like the PC technological seduction factor, but elders ?
Plus, I don't think it is a good idea to rely on people to check if the ballot was printed correctly ; if they hardly can make a cross, they'll simply forget to.
Diebald issued a stream of no less then 3 patches in 3 days to fix their flaming new counting software release. "This will seal the problems while the machines are sealed until SP2 is out" said a pointy haired spokeperson. "We're proactively seeking the achievement of market leadership by deploying retroactive patches to updated software. Nation trust us." he said in a stunning wordplay worth of Nostradamus fame.
Opposers of the Diebald software proposed an open-source alternative , but their open attitude apparently is preventing them from ideologically sealing anything. "Let me patch it realtime while you vote ! Hey watchout I'm patching here !! wait just another minute... " an unidentified supporter said ; a few seconds later an angry queueing sweating roaring mob introduced him to the concept of releasing by due date. No penguin was harmed in the process.
Another angry flash mob quickly assembled in streets chanting praises of the aging, but reliable paper and pen voting system.
1) well prepared, not confusing paper ballot 2) pen 3) make a cross
Optical scanner picks up the cross/sign , spits them out for human check if there's something wrong. The scanner does the jobs of 2 pc (actually it is a slimmed down PC) by counting and collecting data. Less expensive then 2 machines.
Later, while the election results are announced electronically (so making any "realtime freak" happy god knows why) the paper votes are hand recounted just to make sure nobody tampered with the machines.
Given that the cost of a person able to check votes is more or less that of a McDonald burger flipper (nearing 0) , govt can employ for a short time thousands, making them slightly less poor while making a job that's far better then flipping burgers, at least for a few days.
Just a scratch of the basic idea, keep the computers from becoming dominant in the process.
Dude I'm sorry to give you bad news: there will never be a good internet/electronic voting system that entirely replaces paper voting. In a previous/. posting you can read here, I explain why I firmly believe so.
In a short summary: I believe it much more difficult to corrupt a paper voting system then a electronic system. If we really want an electronic voting system, then we must use it as a BACKUP to paper ballot, hand counted system with double-checks. I guess a democratic voting system within a strong law system based on individual Rights is worth every extra dime spent ; we can of course optimize such system and make them become less bureocratic and more efficient, but we can't just trust computers to decide the outcome of an election. I want hundreds, thousand of eyes watching every step of the process getting ready to whisteblow any corruption, wrongdoing or plain old error.
Usually apathic people think this is a waste of time of resource, because after all all politicians are the same bunch of liars and thieves ; there's an hint of truth what they say, but if they really think so why don't they move under a tyranny ? They'll have 0 money spent in voting process and a loooot of problems tearing down their apathy in seconds.
Doesn't it sound absurd, that you're not allowed to say "fuck" on public frequencies (that you can't use anyway but for a very limited portion) yet you can say "fuck" on cable TV ?
What's the difference ? Can't you just tune to another station or use the almighty remote (the last and least power we still have) like every people with half a brain does ?
And given that public frequencies are public, why are they subject to the desires of just a portion (a minority I guess) of the population ?
You know it would have been much better if you enlightened us by explaining your definition of "this trash" and "vulgar", your Majesty. You know what "vulgar" means ? It comes from ancient latin "vulgus" which means "the petty people" the ignorant, lurid and despicable people ; basically 99% of the population.
Oh indeed they were lurid and ignorant like any man or woman when they're born..and thanks to lack of education and poverty they remained so and they still are today in many places in the world. Yeah, the truth hurts.
Back in a not so far time if one dared said something "offensive" about God they were to repent and confess or sometimes received physical punishment (being lashed or whatnot)..the petty people needed to behave and be afraid of saying anything that the powerful ones deemed to be "offensive" or "vulgar" which basically is whatever they tought it was NOT OK to say.
Why not ok ? Because we say so and don't you dare disagree with us you vulgus or you'll make baby Jesus cry ! You don't want to make baby Jesus cry don't you ? You're a bad person !!!
But the powerful ones were not afraid of vulgarity, they were afraid of FREEDOM to say whatever one wants. Today powerfuls understand very well that so called vulgar speaking is of no consequence and no importance, but it remains a good method to make people conform to authority, to make them think there are words that cannot be said and that is good to conform blindly to authority, even if when authority demands you to conform to pointless laws of "you can not say that bad word !"
The most lurid trick is that of making you think that you're being "protected" by some "evil word" as if words were diseases or enemies ; it's just another way to fake working, to let the people think the elected officials are doing "something important that we want" while they're laughing their asses off at people ignorance.
And the most exquisite trick, that of saying the people "but you elected us to protect you, therefore it's only your will we're implementing in law".But the laws are applied to anybody, not only to the ones who voted to elected the officials ; so why should the others conform to the law ?
Because the law is the law and you must obey the law, and who cares if your freedom is restricted ! Mine is not and I don't care about yours. Forget about freedom in America or in Africa or anywhere else, because you said BAD WORDS !
We can do anything because you voted us to take charge, but God forbid you said that bad word ! Ooooooh my goodness the world is going to fall over !
On a tangent: Hey Dick go explain your voters why you can curse so much, but we can't curse on TV on Radio, unless it's on cable television because your friends don't want to lose their markets. Obviously because you're not as gullible as your electors, are you Dick ? You can disrispect people by telling them to "fuck off" but oh god we can't , no no no ! Yeah of course it's not your fault is the other guy fault. Also the CIA has all the faults when the hell falls over.
Slashdot Mirror
forgot to register to vote. Deadline is very close, more info in the linked government website.
Any system can be cheated somehow, given enough motivation to cheat. The big point is how easy it is to cheat ! There's no reason to make a system weaker because the -supposed- future order of difference is one or two points. It smells of apathic depressed behavior, exactly how many politicians would like us to be, apathic and careless.
Maybe you remember the first times newspaper started talking about the "evil computer pirates" (then "hackers" , then "black hat" then god know what they invented) and how they exploited banks' computers.
Remember how people was -totally stunned- by the fact one person could steal millions without actually robbing a bank ? It was fuckinbelievable, yet it was 100% true, it could be done without a trace or a smoking gun. TODAY security is much tighter in many financial systems thanks to hackers exposing or exploiting the loopholes.
So why should we TODAY make the voting system even more cheatable ? We know that computers can be used to manipulate millions of votes in a split second, so for what goddammed reason are we throwing ourself in a predicatable and predicted disaster , with all our past experience with computer abuses ?
The "we must face it" attitude is that of losers.
Gotta love rdif tracking baby eating communists
That of course implies that you were warned in advance of the fact that you're being tracked and that the tracking method doesn't pose any safety hazard to you.
..a blanket "warning: any imagineable, possible and unpossible danger is only your responsability" implies that I can, for instance, enter your property riding an M1A1 Abrams to insure my safety.
For instace I know it's unpratical but I could track you by spraying you with a radioactive agent..pretty much impossible to disable..or I could use a miniaturized cell phone sending realtime data about your location while disabling your pacemaker.
The point being, if you wanna interact with me on your property you have to insure my safety
healthcare and education may not be part of human rights on the paper, but they should be as they are in reality services you can't really do without.
Healthcare..tell me how are you supposed to work while you're being cured ? What if you worked your ass off but you still don't have money to pay for your healthcare because there was a price hike ? What if you didn't smoke or drink or have a reckless behavior and got sick nonetheless ? What if the insurance scams you and you don't have money to pay the lawyer to fight em ?
Education..you wanna remain a brute ? Look at the situation in any piss poor country with poor education..they're practically slaves of anybody who knows more then them. Also, lack of education makes them easier targets for religious zealots, you want to have more terrorists ?
And I won't ever bother comment about what you think you know about taxation. Everyone should share the burned equally, but they're not to be equallty educated or they health shouldn't equally be taken care of. I see, some people is more equal then others....
Dear Slashdotter Serutan,
We're an indipendent group of capitalistic oriented advisers. Our job is to provide companies facing problems with old business models
recycle their old business models in previously unaffected markets. We are aware of your user problems, which also affect many other
industries in which the business model was that of selling "content" with considerable to enormous profits at reasonably low production
costs.
While you were selling cars your customers learned that it was possible to bring more people in the same car or borrow the car, therefore
reducing your sales of "content". Let us enlighten you that what you was really selling was the ability to move at a comparatively cheaper
price without relying on anybody else, in other words "your content". The utter inefficiency of public transport that you so wisely acted
to undercut favoured your business plan, but unfortunately your customeres developed more efficient alternatives, car pooling and hitchhiking friends
and started employing open transporation initiatives. Your shifting the risks on them by making them accountable for almost any
car accident did wonders, but lawsuits for construction defects are an increasing concern.
We suggest you to convert your business to another "content" level ; you could sell ability to use cars by taking stakes in "gasoline" content
or "electricity" or "motor oil". Alternatively you could lobby hard with our help to change the freeway system into a toll-road system, as security
costs will increase with the advent of terrorism.
Other industries are converting from providing "content" to providing "access to content". Because of the extremely low cost of production of
very low quality content (as you know more quantity doesn't imply better quality, but often dilution of investment) which appears to general public
as "more choice" it is far more profiteable to sell access to content by taxing the user at the access point, for instance by Transportation
Rights Management or by charging the customer a fixed price "all you can eat" access to low quality productions, an higher price for higher
quality.
Even better,you could charge for -using the tools- needed to access whatever content, but this will require more synchronization with
other industries. With our help we're sure will find a way to restore your business model in the future, by changing the look of everything
without really changing nothing.
And yes, everybody will admit your right.
By reading this message you agree to subject yourself to a regressive, pro-forma economic system.
Well thanks for revealing the criminals you're armed and dangerous. If I was a criminal, I wouldn't think twice about first shooting you and then evaluate if it was worth the bullet. Safety first and after all you don't expect the criminal to come so he's got the tactical advantage of surprise.
Your gun is useful only if the attacker is unarmed or if you see him first, but for some reason some gun owner believes he's the only one who is smart and prepared. Talk about daydreaming.
Because I felt like I wanted my car tuned up to maintain good performance over time ; treat any machine well and it will bring you anywhere.
..kaching..kaching..kaching. Little, but persistant.
..but promised me to spend some time thinking about it. The day after he discovered it was just a loose part not fixed well after the tuneup.
The technician was happy to do the cleaning job that he knew well, he was paid for and did a good job. My car felt like new, no Ferrari but hey it was a tune up not a modification ! While I was waiting a car salesman approached me, proposing me to trade in the old car for a brand new one, offering a good deal. I refused as I went in for a tune up and I didn't want to give up a perfectly good car that was OK for my needs.
The car salesman didn't pressure me much, I later realized. After like a week of traveling I noticed a noise I had never noticed before
I was a little alarmed, but the car didn't seem to behave badly. I didn't want to run in trouble, so I went back to the mechanic. The technician said he didn't know, and asked his coworkers..meanwhile the car salesman said that he knew, it was a structural defect of some pump and that to save me time and expenses he would have replaced it for little money. That "kaching" was typical of the problem, which was little known but to insiders.
I said I would have tought about that, and I went to another mechanic, who didn't know
Kaching...you need new hardware or the world will fall apart...kaching..it's a big problem, we don't want you in harm.
I wish that reality was so clear cut and easy, but it sounds much more like a Walmart public relations (read propaganda) statement then reality.
..which means that after paying wages and other workforce costs Walmart makes an average of 5300 USD net profit for each employee they have and they have lots.
In 2003, out of a 229 Billion USD net sales made a 8 Billion USD net profit (after taxes). The operating cost was near 39 Billion USD which includes the cost of workforce , around 1 Million 500 thousand employees worldwide
Also, if we consider the 39 Billions USD operating and sales costs as entirely made of wages received by employees (but they're not ! as they include other costs) and divide by 1.5M employees that would mean that on average each employee would cost 26000 USD a year ; considering 8 hours work a day for 300 days a year that'd make a theoretical wage of nearly 10 USD per hour per employee before taxes and it's even lower if they pull free extra hours.
But that 39 Billlion include also operating, administrative and other many cost streams which are not detailed into consolidated statement, it's not entirely wages to workers..so my guess (without further data) is that the average wage is probably around 6-5 USD per hour.
A grim outlook for workers indeed and for governments supplementing their minimal incomes.
While mom & pop store cannot command lower goods price at wholesale, it seems Walrmart isn't so good at commanding low prices as the the cost of stuff being bought was around 190 Billion if my memory serves ; a big mom and pop store in which guess who gets screwed the most ? The store boy.
Allow me to shed some more light.
From Merriam Webster definition of censorship:
the institution, system, or practice of censoring and the definition of censoring: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable
Now in this case I fail to see any government censorship on these stories, but that doesn't imply other entities didn't choose to censor some story. Indeed the editors of any publication have censoring powers (by the mean of not publishing what some call hysterical crap, others call uncomfortable articles) unless when they allow almost complete freedom of choice to their journalist , retaining the power to refuse to publish an article at the price of starting an internal conflict with the journalists.
From the project website, in the "About" section we read:
Project Censored compiles an annual list of 25 news stories of social significance that have been overlooked, under-reported or self-censored by the country's major national news media.
Quite clearly they're referring to a generic entity known as "major national news media" which, they feel, should have published the articles they deem to be of the utmost importance.
That's exactly what some people out there do when they blame "the liberal media" for almost anything wrong under the sun , while the projects does blame generic major media for underreporting stories. Perfectly fine with me, as nobody is forced to believe whatever the "anti-liberal media" people say as well as whatever the project says.
NRA would probably send you an horse head in your bed as a present because your description of the problems applies perfectly to hand held weapons.
Maybe 99.9% of firearms are not used to kill humans , yet that 0.01% could be one man or one thousand depending on the numbers. Something must therefore be done as killing is a serious problem, much more important then copyright infringments unless you value copyright more then human life, which I seriously hope you don't.
So in a knee jerk reaction we could, quite simply, choose a radical solution and outlaw production and sales of guns as this network of death must be shut down. To avoid this solution, traceability and responsability must either go to the firearm producer or to the user, or to both to alleviate the weight (if possible).
If we shut down Kazaa, which has legitimate uses, then we must literally raze any weapon building manufacturer today as the latter is far far more dangerous then filesharing tools.
if you are salaried, then anything you invent duing your job tenure that is reasonably related to your job desciption should be the company's property
Most employers are perfectly willing to give exemptions for unrelated stuff, they just would prefer not to get screwed, and a blanket clause in the contract is the fastest way to prevent
that
I think this is complete bullshit ; while it appears to be a preventive clause, protecting from employees stealing concepts the company didn't patent (and why didn't the company patent it, are they lazy or what ?) I think it is just a clause some companies want to use to take ideas from employees for free without taking the burden of proving it was a company developed concept.
For instace if I join a company and while I work over there I see a number of problems related to something the company is working on and I find a solution (which is what any company is looking for) there's no contribution from the company, it's a work I did, not the company. So why should they get it for free, on the presumption I somehow "stole it" ?
News at 11: People are far more unfair then life.
Good, what company are you working for ?
Let's make some safe assumption shall we :
1. The majority of companies that operate in your field of work choose to apply the "I own your inventions" provision as standard in contracts.
2. But you oppose it, on the reasonable grounds that
a)being employed in one company doesn't imply that the company helped develop/conceive the
idea even if the product is sold in the same market.
b)the burden of proof of misappropriation should be on the company, there shouldn't be a burden on inventor who patented the idea, as he's potentially disclosing the idea to the world by patenting it.
3. Therefore, you find yourself out of 80-100% of your job's market and are indirectly forced to get another job, at least until you find some better company in your field (which may never happen)
I can't think of anything more chilling to innovation and invention then a provision that says "everything you haven't disclosed to us before is likely to be ours" ; who in his right mind would ever -think- about inventing something in his field of works, knowing that a previous employer may sue the hell out of him and win, only because of the amount of money they have and the amount you don't ?
Dude I think you are leaving one utopia (government does all) to join another utopia (free market does all).
As a matter of fact there is no necessary implication between the presence of a unrestricted market and the presence of goods that 1. are necessary to live or 2. are appreciated and demanded by almost everyone in the population.
In other words, one may have free market (really free market, based on strict respect of rules of competition) and have conditions which are _as bad_ as that offered by a totalitarian centralized economy runned by a government.
That CAN happen when the competition isn't really unrestricted and when pre-conditions of the free market theory aren't met ; this outcome is the most likely to happen, as the pre-conditions set by free market theory are as well-defined as completely utopian.
In my opinion, we shouldn't look at who's providing the goods, but at how the goods are actually invented and produced : we should concentrate on technological innovation, which is REAL engine behind the presence of today advanced goods and the possibility of producing loads of these goods to satisfy wider demands.
In other words: it's not "market" or "government" providing us with the GOODS we want or need : it is technology at service of illuministic and democratic ideals and concepts like these of individual inalienable rights, human rights, individual freedom and cooperation to achieve common interests. It's the people actually thinking, inventing and producing things with the goal of making them avaiable in a sustainable way to the largest possible population.
Yeah you probably would pay because you experienced broadband and can't fall back to dialup but for a fee weeks. But people not used to broadband are less likely to experience the withdrawl effects :) ..so marketers must induce it in the middleofnowhere population..a $500 introductory fee would probably act more as a disincentive then a incentive.
High speed download access , but DSL (at best) upload access. So yeah it's cool, good for people in remote places without DSL/Cable access ..but I wonder who will pay the alleged $500 upfront cost in rural areas .....
Oh wait, Porn ! Ahhh if only research against cancer was half as popular.
Eh I like common sense :) Too bad if anybody uses common sense too much you end up with botulin in your common-sense-level sterilized jars.
Oh and the meteor is indeed heated to thousand degrees during entry phase, but not necessarily uniformly heated. Think about the Space Shuttle..if it was uniformly heated at the temperature of the heat shield you'd have a bunch of unhappy vaporized astronauts ; fortunately that doesn't happen (unless you have an hole in the wing).
So yeah it is in theory possible for some lifeform to enter the planet by hitchhiking some meteor. I'll declare a War on Illegal Aliens asap.
Complex Formula Not Complex Formula
Takes t>30'| (x+y)^2=(x^2+y^2+2xy) | x^(-1)=1/x
Takes t<30'| ln(e^x)=x | 2x2
If you can understand what's wrong with the matrix above, you don't need to read that book. If you can't, you need to understand the stuff above before reading that book.
Well dude I guess people may be stupid, but if they're stupid enough not to make a CROSS on a piece of paper I don't know how they'll be able to push the exact area on a touch screen. Maybe youngers will like the PC technological seduction factor, but elders ?
Plus, I don't think it is a good idea to rely on people to check if the ballot was printed correctly ; if they hardly can make a cross, they'll simply forget to.
Diebald issued a stream of no less then 3 patches in 3 days to fix their flaming new counting software release. "This will seal the problems while the machines are sealed until SP2 is out" said a pointy haired spokeperson. "We're proactively seeking the achievement of market leadership by deploying retroactive patches to updated software. Nation trust us." he said in a stunning wordplay worth of Nostradamus fame.
... " an unidentified supporter said ; a few seconds later an angry queueing sweating roaring mob introduced him to the concept of releasing by due date. No penguin was harmed in the process.
Opposers of the Diebald software proposed an open-source alternative , but their open attitude apparently is preventing them from ideologically sealing anything. "Let me patch it realtime while you vote ! Hey watchout I'm patching here !! wait just another minute
Another angry flash mob quickly assembled in streets chanting praises of the aging, but reliable paper and pen voting system.
Let me propose an alternative
1) well prepared, not confusing paper ballot
2) pen
3) make a cross
Optical scanner picks up the cross/sign , spits them out for human check if there's something wrong. The scanner does the jobs of 2 pc (actually it is a slimmed down PC) by counting and collecting data. Less expensive then 2 machines.
Later, while the election results are announced electronically (so making any "realtime freak" happy god knows why) the paper votes are hand recounted just to make sure nobody tampered with the machines.
Given that the cost of a person able to check votes is more or less that of a McDonald burger flipper (nearing 0) , govt can employ for a short time thousands, making them slightly less poor while making a job that's far better then flipping burgers, at least for a few days.
Just a scratch of the basic idea, keep the computers from becoming dominant in the process.
Dude I'm sorry to give you bad news: there will never be a good internet/electronic voting system that entirely replaces paper voting. In a previous /. posting you can read here, I explain why I firmly believe so.
In a short summary: I believe it much more difficult to corrupt a paper voting system then a electronic system. If we really want an electronic voting system, then we must use it as a BACKUP to paper ballot, hand counted system with double-checks. I guess a democratic voting system within a strong law system based on individual Rights is worth every extra dime spent ; we can of course optimize such system and make them become less bureocratic and more efficient, but we can't just trust computers to decide the outcome of an election. I want hundreds, thousand of eyes watching every step of the process getting ready to whisteblow any corruption, wrongdoing or plain old error.
Usually apathic people think this is a waste of time of resource, because after all all politicians are the same bunch of liars and thieves ; there's an hint of truth what they say, but if they really think so why don't they move under a tyranny ? They'll have 0 money spent in voting process and a loooot of problems tearing down their apathy in seconds.
Doesn't it sound absurd, that you're not allowed to say "fuck" on public frequencies (that you can't use anyway but for a very limited portion) yet you can say "fuck" on cable TV ?
What's the difference ? Can't you just tune to another station or use the almighty remote (the last and least power we still have) like every people with half a brain does ?
And given that public frequencies are public, why are they subject to the desires of just a portion (a minority I guess) of the population ?
You know it would have been much better if you enlightened us by explaining your definition of "this trash" and "vulgar", your Majesty.
You know what "vulgar" means ? It comes from ancient latin "vulgus" which means "the petty people" the ignorant, lurid and despicable people ; basically 99% of the population.
Oh indeed they were lurid and ignorant like any man or woman when they're born..and thanks to lack of education and poverty they remained so and they still are today in many places in the world. Yeah, the truth hurts.
Back in a not so far time if one dared said something "offensive" about God they were to repent and confess or sometimes received physical punishment (being lashed or whatnot)..the petty people needed to behave and be afraid of saying anything that the powerful ones deemed to be "offensive" or "vulgar" which basically is whatever they tought it was NOT OK to say.
Why not ok ? Because we say so and don't you dare disagree with us you vulgus or you'll make baby Jesus cry ! You don't want to make baby Jesus cry don't you ? You're a bad person !!!
But the powerful ones were not afraid of vulgarity, they were afraid of FREEDOM to say whatever one wants. Today powerfuls understand very well that so called vulgar speaking is of no consequence and no importance, but it remains a good method to make people conform to authority, to make them think there are words that cannot be said and that is good to conform blindly to authority, even if when authority demands you to conform to pointless laws of "you can not say that bad word !"
The most lurid trick is that of making you think that you're being "protected" by some "evil word" as if words were diseases or enemies ; it's just another way to fake working, to let the people think the elected officials are doing "something important that we want" while they're laughing their asses off at people ignorance.
And the most exquisite trick, that of saying the people "but you elected us to protect you, therefore it's only your will we're implementing in law".But the laws are applied to anybody, not only to the ones who voted to elected the officials ; so why should the others conform to the law ?
Because the law is the law and you must obey the law, and who cares if your freedom is restricted ! Mine is not and I don't care about yours. Forget about freedom in America or in Africa or anywhere else, because you said BAD WORDS !
We can do anything because you voted us to take charge, but God forbid you said that bad word ! Ooooooh my goodness the world is going to fall over !
On a tangent: Hey Dick go explain your voters why you can curse so much, but we can't curse on TV on Radio, unless it's on cable television because your friends don't want to lose their markets. Obviously because you're not as gullible as your electors, are you Dick ? You can disrispect people by telling them to "fuck off" but oh god we can't , no no no ! Yeah of course it's not your fault is the other guy fault. Also the CIA has all the faults when the hell falls over.