But to finish my point, regulation is not for every industry, but it's sometimes necessary for monopolies or near-monopolies because the consumer has a weak bargaining position.
The reason those monopolies exist has already been identified - they're a natural monopoly (or at least a natural oligopoly) like electricity or natural gas. There's a massive amount of infrastructure involved, and the cost of that only works out if you can recover that investment with a certain percentage of subscribers.
That's more to do with ability for competitors to set up business. Much like a gas pipeline, you can't have 5 alternatives in town for Internet without some kind of compromise.
they are selling virtual bandwidth on a pipe that is already there.
That's sort of covered by the ad. The burgers were already ready, but they wanted to charge extra to deliver it sooner.
Papa Johns needs an army of low paid workers, having them pay for health insurance will hit their business model.
Papa Johns already had a loophole for this all along anyway. Most locations are independent franchises that don't have enough employees to fall under any insurance requirements anyway.
Sure - the relevant part is the store here. But still, looking at the screenshot on Wikipedia it really looks like most of what makes iTunes 1.0 what it was was created after the developers were hired on by Apple. Also, I'll fight you on the use of the term fork if it's the same developers refining the same software and merely discontinuing the original name.
I only wish someone at Apple would fork iTunes 1.0 and add some modern features to it sans-bloat. It really was a great music player/library app. They should merge the app store with their music store on the desktop and make the music player just a music player again.
If anything, it's merely a breach of contract. I don't even think this could count as a copyright distribution violation by Apple because they were licensed to distribute.
I can't remember the name but Apple bought it and created itunes.
iTunes was created by direct agreement between publishers and Apple. Some features of iTunes (like Cover Flow) were created by other people and purchased by Apple, but both the core software and the store were built by Apple.
What's the alternative? Doing all your business in cash and in person?
The alternative is to buy from a competitor that hasn't had such a major breach in recent history. Sure, their security practices may not actually be that good and it's luck more than anything - but it at least puts incentivizing good practices on the table in the first place.
"making sure no one goes hungry" != getting proper nutrition. There are a lot of ways to get your calorie requirements met without getting your brain development nutrient requirements met. School programs make sure kids get at least one meal a day (if the problem is financial need rather than neglect), but beyond that you have to have parents that care. These other programs do not reach into your household and make you not eat and feed your kids junk food.
Most of the gains in IQ (readjustment, technically, because average is centered on 100) have been from changing nutrition in the US in the last 100 years.
reading comprehension is in fact a measure of intelligence.
It's a measure of education. If you only barely know how to read, it's going to affect how well you understand the question being presented. IQ is intended to measure strictly raw capability rather than training/knowledge.
And the part of IQ that isn't genetics is probably correlated with nutrition (which would be the main difference between populations). However, IQ tests don't just test IQ - they test reading comprehension and literacy.
Those with an IQ around 85 or 90 (depending on who you ask) will be most likely to be criminals. Above that IQ there is greater profit in getting a job.
Above that IQ, they will perform better as criminals. Those without scruples make more money - true sociopaths become CEOs. Sometimes the crime is under the guise of working for a corporation - sometimes its solo work. IQ just means being more capable - both of achieving and of covering up your tracks.
On the other hand, this software is nothing but bias. Free will vs. determinism and they're siding with determinism. It might match the religious and racial bias of an average human.
"private IP address ranges" are in the eye of the beholder.
Somewhat true. I mean if you don't want to be able to connect to parts of China, you can use 123.123.0.0/16, but the IP range is defined as public - and registered under APNIC.
Look, it doesn't matter who wrote it. Or that none of them were perfect. The fact is, it is the law. And now you think someone born almost 200 years later wrote it?
Did Afro-Americans have any input into it? They didn't, so how can they be ruled by it? They never consented, never voted, the whole thing needs to be torn up and redone
That's how sovereign nations work. I didn't vote for it either. It was hundreds of years before I was born. . Advocating for a war has nothing to do with whether it is the current, actual, real law. Which is what you seemed to be disputing with terms like "discredited."
Was that before or after they infected black people with syphilis
Define "they." Do you mean people incidentally employed by the government making independent decisions or what "We the People" actually set out to do with our votes? Poor and unethical practices affected medical studies of all races at the time.
It appears they're trolling. My own subthread on this is being stonewalled with completely outrageous claims. Not just saying it's racist, but that it's not even the law of the land - despite state's powers being explicitly listed in the 10th Amendment:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." -- The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
The EU seems to be modeled after what the US was supposed to be, independent states with a common government to regulate commerce and common good between them. OP seems to think that because the Civil War was fought over states' rights over slavery, that this means that states are supposed to completely acquiesce the last shreds of individuality to the federal government. This despite the fact that states still very much have their own governments.
I haven't seen anything to suggest that. They are relatively unorganized, but I haven't seen anything in support of fascism. Communism or Socialism maybe, but fascism is quite right-wing - strong nationalism and white supremacy are core tenets.
Because here's mine: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." -- The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Whatever you think is better or not, the nation was founded on different principles - mostly based on the tyranny of Britain and never wanting to deal with that again. While slavery was already a hot topic in the late 1700's, it certainly wasn't the dominant cause behind state powers.
And "Anyone who uses states rights is a racist using a codeword to reach a racist audience" is provably false. Here I am using the words to reach you and you don't seem to be a racist.
It may be used as a codeword, but that doesn't mean that states' rights are inherently racist or that that's where it started. It's been part of the concept and debate from the beginning, and the 10th amendment makes it pretty clear that there is to be some level of separation.
Slashdot Mirror
But to finish my point, regulation is not for every industry, but it's sometimes necessary for monopolies or near-monopolies because the consumer has a weak bargaining position.
The reason those monopolies exist has already been identified - they're a natural monopoly (or at least a natural oligopoly) like electricity or natural gas. There's a massive amount of infrastructure involved, and the cost of that only works out if you can recover that investment with a certain percentage of subscribers.
That's more to do with ability for competitors to set up business. Much like a gas pipeline, you can't have 5 alternatives in town for Internet without some kind of compromise.
they are selling virtual bandwidth on a pipe that is already there.
That's sort of covered by the ad. The burgers were already ready, but they wanted to charge extra to deliver it sooner.
Papa Johns needs an army of low paid workers, having them pay for health insurance will hit their business model.
Papa Johns already had a loophole for this all along anyway. Most locations are independent franchises that don't have enough employees to fall under any insurance requirements anyway.
Sure - the relevant part is the store here. But still, looking at the screenshot on Wikipedia it really looks like most of what makes iTunes 1.0 what it was was created after the developers were hired on by Apple. Also, I'll fight you on the use of the term fork if it's the same developers refining the same software and merely discontinuing the original name.
I only wish someone at Apple would fork iTunes 1.0 and add some modern features to it sans-bloat. It really was a great music player/library app. They should merge the app store with their music store on the desktop and make the music player just a music player again.
If anything, it's merely a breach of contract. I don't even think this could count as a copyright distribution violation by Apple because they were licensed to distribute.
I can't remember the name but Apple bought it and created itunes.
iTunes was created by direct agreement between publishers and Apple. Some features of iTunes (like Cover Flow) were created by other people and purchased by Apple, but both the core software and the store were built by Apple.
iTunes is somewhat known for releasing stuff early due to mishap.
Hence the correct use of the term SNAFU.
What's the alternative? Doing all your business in cash and in person?
The alternative is to buy from a competitor that hasn't had such a major breach in recent history. Sure, their security practices may not actually be that good and it's luck more than anything - but it at least puts incentivizing good practices on the table in the first place.
Did you ever think that the person who can't be amused easily is the boring one?
You don't even have to climb a mountain to get that high - you can drive to 14K feet by car in Colorado.
And you expect B - it's apparently not happening.
"making sure no one goes hungry" != getting proper nutrition. There are a lot of ways to get your calorie requirements met without getting your brain development nutrient requirements met. School programs make sure kids get at least one meal a day (if the problem is financial need rather than neglect), but beyond that you have to have parents that care. These other programs do not reach into your household and make you not eat and feed your kids junk food.
Most of the gains in IQ (readjustment, technically, because average is centered on 100) have been from changing nutrition in the US in the last 100 years.
reading comprehension is in fact a measure of intelligence.
It's a measure of education. If you only barely know how to read, it's going to affect how well you understand the question being presented. IQ is intended to measure strictly raw capability rather than training/knowledge.
And the part of IQ that isn't genetics is probably correlated with nutrition (which would be the main difference between populations). However, IQ tests don't just test IQ - they test reading comprehension and literacy.
Those with an IQ around 85 or 90 (depending on who you ask) will be most likely to be criminals. Above that IQ there is greater profit in getting a job.
Above that IQ, they will perform better as criminals. Those without scruples make more money - true sociopaths become CEOs. Sometimes the crime is under the guise of working for a corporation - sometimes its solo work. IQ just means being more capable - both of achieving and of covering up your tracks.
On the other hand, this software is nothing but bias. Free will vs. determinism and they're siding with determinism. It might match the religious and racial bias of an average human.
"private IP address ranges" are in the eye of the beholder.
Somewhat true. I mean if you don't want to be able to connect to parts of China, you can use 123.123.0.0/16, but the IP range is defined as public - and registered under APNIC.
Look, it doesn't matter who wrote it. Or that none of them were perfect. The fact is, it is the law. And now you think someone born almost 200 years later wrote it?
Did Afro-Americans have any input into it? They didn't, so how can they be ruled by it? They never consented, never voted, the whole thing needs to be torn up and redone
That's how sovereign nations work. I didn't vote for it either. It was hundreds of years before I was born. . Advocating for a war has nothing to do with whether it is the current, actual, real law. Which is what you seemed to be disputing with terms like "discredited."
Was that before or after they infected black people with syphilis
Define "they." Do you mean people incidentally employed by the government making independent decisions or what "We the People" actually set out to do with our votes? Poor and unethical practices affected medical studies of all races at the time.
It appears they're trolling. My own subthread on this is being stonewalled with completely outrageous claims. Not just saying it's racist, but that it's not even the law of the land - despite state's powers being explicitly listed in the 10th Amendment:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
-- The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
The EU seems to be modeled after what the US was supposed to be, independent states with a common government to regulate commerce and common good between them. OP seems to think that because the Civil War was fought over states' rights over slavery, that this means that states are supposed to completely acquiesce the last shreds of individuality to the federal government. This despite the fact that states still very much have their own governments.
Yes, please. Seems that the only thing you can buy is women's pants with a man's label.
I haven't seen anything to suggest that. They are relatively unorganized, but I haven't seen anything in support of fascism. Communism or Socialism maybe, but fascism is quite right-wing - strong nationalism and white supremacy are core tenets.
I see you're ignoring actual quotes from our Constitution. That's reality. There's nothing discredited about the US government.
Citation needed.
Because here's mine:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
-- The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Whatever you think is better or not, the nation was founded on different principles - mostly based on the tyranny of Britain and never wanting to deal with that again. While slavery was already a hot topic in the late 1700's, it certainly wasn't the dominant cause behind state powers.
And "Anyone who uses states rights is a racist using a codeword to reach a racist audience" is provably false. Here I am using the words to reach you and you don't seem to be a racist.
That's what Soros-funded Antifa wants.
So....are you pro-fascism? I mean, if the debate over the NFL is any indication, we certainly seem to be headed there.
It may be used as a codeword, but that doesn't mean that states' rights are inherently racist or that that's where it started. It's been part of the concept and debate from the beginning, and the 10th amendment makes it pretty clear that there is to be some level of separation.