This is why liberals have to dissemble about Silicon Valley and racial equality. They have to actively suppress information about certain races in order to make their narrative work. They have to pretend non-whites are white.
Some people even hide their non-white racial/ethnic origin in order to avoid reverse discrimination. It's not just for cracker tea baggers.
> You mean that when the middle class became so poor that they couldn't afford to have a servant take care of the children the laws changed? What a surprise!
The middle class originally referred to merchants, not wage slaves. What you think of the middle class really isn't.
You're all just different levels of the working class.
I was amused by the "unwanted sexual advances" part. Given current social expectations, that number is gibberish. It's also unclear if it's anything to actually be concerned about.
On the other hand, without such stuff the local COBOL programmer might still be working in the field rather than being a very respectable housewife.
That makes for a nice hissy fit but it's not really been bourne out in practice. Proprietary software continues to thrive. It can even be built on top of Free Software. The two can co-exist quite well and suit different purposes for different people.
The only real objection you have is some infantile notion that you can't call someone else's work your own exclusive property.
> of intolerance. That is something the Democrats get that the Republicans never will because the Republicans oppress freedom of speech by allowing speech they shouldn't allow.
You have that exactly backwards.
It's liberals that throw hissy fits, riot, and claim it's fine to punch anyone they don't approve of. Your notion of liberalism and Democrats is at least 20 years out of date if not more.
That's still a huge burden for any car buyer in 2017. So instead of the car only costing an arm and a leg and another food, it just costs and arm and a leg. That's not even getting into international income comparisons.
It is a moot point. All you're doing with all of your screeching and fighting is simply altering the time table. The same mooch will still avoid paying even if you invent the perfect anti-piracy measures. They will just catch content at the other end of the pricing cycle.
Meanwhile, you could potentially do great harm in terms of personal rights and sabotage of technology if you're allowed your copyright maximalists dream.
Also, it's not stealing if what you are "pirating" should rightfully be in the public domain now. That is the result of an equally "greedy and entitled" corporate mindset you would probably happily give a free pass to.
In other words these are the equivalent of bog standard HTPC devices that have been around for years and years already. It's just now that there are cheap Android versions and they're on sale at Amazon.
Most of what gets played on my "illegal streaming devices" are shows and movies that should be out of copyright by now.
They were bought and paid for long ago.
So there's no more blood to be squeezed from that particular turnip ever.
It's utter rubbish and ignores the audience ratings. Bad movies have always gotten rubbish ratings from "critics". This is nothing new. I remember how the critics trashed ever original Star Wars movie.
It's the audience ratings that are more likely to kill a picture.
This is a good thing. Companies shouldn't be able to make money off of garbage that the customers don't even like.
Except that was done by the original party. Based on Swiss law, Slashdot is committing libel by publishing this whole nonsense. If you can't information about nonsense, even if it that nonsense might include the fact that someone slandered someone else, then journalism and free speech are pretty much meaningless.
Except it's not a fallacy. Journalists have turned into propaganda mongers. They only present the facts and stories that suit them. They will leave out key relevant details and gravely distort things.
You may need an opposing news source to present the rest of the facts about a particular story and undo the intention distortion perpetrated by the other.
You are the one applying childlike naivete to something that has become terribly crass and distorted.
We're not talking about "opposing views" we're talking about alternative half-truth's that fit different narratives. Modern journalism is NOT about giving you the facts. It's about creating stories and pushing an agenda. Facts and events that don't fit the editor's world view simply will not be presented.
If you haven't gotten past that yet, you're still just an idiot being influenced by mind control towers.
Yet despite of that, they sometimes manage to have far more comprehensive facts and analysis than anyone else. They pay proper attention to some stories that Anglo-American media gloss over.
if you're discounting any source, you're just demonstrating what part of your personal political bias you don't want challenged.
You're only laughing at Breitbart because your corporate master told you to.
If you're only paying attention to one particular narrative, then you're a chump. Doesn't matter what that narrative is. There is really no way to choose "A" news source. You have to pick several with opposing narratives.
Even Al-Jazeera will cover what American liberal media chooses to gloss over about a liberal President.
It wasn't what Trump said. The entire media narrative about polls and his chances of getting elected should have clued you in that the rest of "professional journalism" went the way of Fox News.
When have journalists ever NOT botched a story you had any independent knowledge of.
If you're lucky, you get the half of the truth they want you to know that supports their narrative. If you're unlucky, it's a total fabrication.
The last election cycle just made it a lot more obvious. So have a number of stories afterwards. The "Russian hack" narrative is just the cherry on top of the flaming pile of poo.
That's already factored into the contract. This just ends of being "the cost of doing business". Unless there's a clause where Google gets compensated, all they have is a duty to perform. Otherwise they will be in breach.
Except much like the Soviet Union or China, that will gut incentives to do interesting/useful work. The only reason anyone will go to college is to avoid manual labor. Endeavors that require more effort will suffer.
YOU are slow. YOU are holding everyone else up. YOU creating an unnecessary mess and crowd in the store. YOU are interfering with the grocer making more money.
The bag boy is there to help speed up the entire process.
It's that whole productivity and efficiency thing Europeans are so allergic too.
Slashdot Mirror
This is why liberals have to dissemble about Silicon Valley and racial equality. They have to actively suppress information about certain races in order to make their narrative work. They have to pretend non-whites are white.
Some people even hide their non-white racial/ethnic origin in order to avoid reverse discrimination. It's not just for cracker tea baggers.
> Reverse discrimination is like unicorns. Often spoken about but never seen.
No. It's seen. But if you say anything about it you get made fun of.
We're all equal but some are more equal than others. It's like that other book by Orwell that Democrats keep using like a manual.
> You mean that when the middle class became so poor that they couldn't afford to have a servant take care of the children the laws changed? What a surprise!
The middle class originally referred to merchants, not wage slaves. What you think of the middle class really isn't.
You're all just different levels of the working class.
I was amused by the "unwanted sexual advances" part. Given current social expectations, that number is gibberish. It's also unclear if it's anything to actually be concerned about.
On the other hand, without such stuff the local COBOL programmer might still be working in the field rather than being a very respectable housewife.
I am a Turing complete system. The minor syntax error was not a problem.
> My position is that the GPL is inherently toxic
That makes for a nice hissy fit but it's not really been bourne out in practice. Proprietary software continues to thrive. It can even be built on top of Free Software. The two can co-exist quite well and suit different purposes for different people.
The only real objection you have is some infantile notion that you can't call someone else's work your own exclusive property.
> of intolerance. That is something the Democrats get that the Republicans never will because the Republicans oppress freedom of speech by allowing speech they shouldn't allow.
You have that exactly backwards.
It's liberals that throw hissy fits, riot, and claim it's fine to punch anyone they don't approve of. Your notion of liberalism and Democrats is at least 20 years out of date if not more.
Well yeah except racism has been so badly diluted as a term as to become absolutely meaningless. The same goes for terrorism too.
>Wow. 134 days into the dumpster fire of a presidency and they're still raising an effigy of Hillary
You mean the liberal media? Yeah. They keep on flogging that dead horse like it's going to suddenly wake up and charge the enemy.
In other words, you don't really have a good answer. You can't come up with a good answer. The best you can do is deflect.
That's still a huge burden for any car buyer in 2017. So instead of the car only costing an arm and a leg and another food, it just costs and arm and a leg. That's not even getting into international income comparisons.
It is a moot point. All you're doing with all of your screeching and fighting is simply altering the time table. The same mooch will still avoid paying even if you invent the perfect anti-piracy measures. They will just catch content at the other end of the pricing cycle.
Meanwhile, you could potentially do great harm in terms of personal rights and sabotage of technology if you're allowed your copyright maximalists dream.
Also, it's not stealing if what you are "pirating" should rightfully be in the public domain now. That is the result of an equally "greedy and entitled" corporate mindset you would probably happily give a free pass to.
In other words these are the equivalent of bog standard HTPC devices that have been around for years and years already. It's just now that there are cheap Android versions and they're on sale at Amazon.
Most of what gets played on my "illegal streaming devices" are shows and movies that should be out of copyright by now.
They were bought and paid for long ago.
So there's no more blood to be squeezed from that particular turnip ever.
It's utter rubbish and ignores the audience ratings. Bad movies have always gotten rubbish ratings from "critics". This is nothing new. I remember how the critics trashed ever original Star Wars movie.
It's the audience ratings that are more likely to kill a picture.
This is a good thing. Companies shouldn't be able to make money off of garbage that the customers don't even like.
Except that was done by the original party. Based on Swiss law, Slashdot is committing libel by publishing this whole nonsense. If you can't information about nonsense, even if it that nonsense might include the fact that someone slandered someone else, then journalism and free speech are pretty much meaningless.
Except it's not a fallacy. Journalists have turned into propaganda mongers. They only present the facts and stories that suit them. They will leave out key relevant details and gravely distort things.
You may need an opposing news source to present the rest of the facts about a particular story and undo the intention distortion perpetrated by the other.
You are the one applying childlike naivete to something that has become terribly crass and distorted.
We're not talking about "opposing views" we're talking about alternative half-truth's that fit different narratives. Modern journalism is NOT about giving you the facts. It's about creating stories and pushing an agenda. Facts and events that don't fit the editor's world view simply will not be presented.
If you haven't gotten past that yet, you're still just an idiot being influenced by mind control towers.
Yet despite of that, they sometimes manage to have far more comprehensive facts and analysis than anyone else. They pay proper attention to some stories that Anglo-American media gloss over.
if you're discounting any source, you're just demonstrating what part of your personal political bias you don't want challenged.
You're only laughing at Breitbart because your corporate master told you to.
If you're only paying attention to one particular narrative, then you're a chump. Doesn't matter what that narrative is. There is really no way to choose "A" news source. You have to pick several with opposing narratives.
Even Al-Jazeera will cover what American liberal media chooses to gloss over about a liberal President.
It wasn't what Trump said. The entire media narrative about polls and his chances of getting elected should have clued you in that the rest of "professional journalism" went the way of Fox News.
When have journalists ever NOT botched a story you had any independent knowledge of.
If you're lucky, you get the half of the truth they want you to know that supports their narrative. If you're unlucky, it's a total fabrication.
The last election cycle just made it a lot more obvious. So have a number of stories afterwards. The "Russian hack" narrative is just the cherry on top of the flaming pile of poo.
The fact that a corporation can even be empowered to exist is an extra power of government that may are may not be ultimately legitimate.
It's like how intellectual property is allowable but not mandatory.
Corporation is not a person. Never was really. The idea that it is is just bad jurisprudence taken too far.
That's already factored into the contract. This just ends of being "the cost of doing business". Unless there's a clause where Google gets compensated, all they have is a duty to perform. Otherwise they will be in breach.
Except much like the Soviet Union or China, that will gut incentives to do interesting/useful work. The only reason anyone will go to college is to avoid manual labor. Endeavors that require more effort will suffer.
YOU are slow. YOU are holding everyone else up. YOU creating an unnecessary mess and crowd in the store. YOU are interfering with the grocer making more money.
The bag boy is there to help speed up the entire process.
It's that whole productivity and efficiency thing Europeans are so allergic too.