I disagree. I'm not a native English speaker, but most music I listen to has English lyrics. Now - I've even got a hard time to understand the lyrics in my native language. For English songs, I really need to concentrate hard to understand the lyrics. Therefore they could very well sing "LaLaLa" (OK, with some variations...) and it wouldn't change much the way I feel for/perceive a song. It's more about the phrasing, rhythm and melody. The voice is just another instrument - and a very versatile one. Oh, and did I mention that I absolutely love monumental choirs?:)
That's not right. Our expression is "(Aber) Man hat schon Pferde vor der Apotheke kotzen gesehen." A translation might be "(But) Horses have been seen vomitting in front of a pharmacy". It's a phrase that's added after describing a very unlikely situation, which may nonetheless happen, e.g. "Given X and Y, I doubt that Z will happen... but horses have been seen..."
That article is about kino.to, a streaming "service" for pirated movies, to which you had to subscribe for a flat monthly fee. It is assumed (and that's what the Süddeutsche article linked there states), that anybody subscribing to that service had to know - by using common sense - that it can only be an illegal streaming portal and that streaming of illegal content is, well - illegal. And you had to be a suscriber in order to use that service.
The question is whether that worry is rational or not
I don't think that is the point. It's rather how many feel the same (rational or not) and censor themselves. If a big enough part of a constitutional democratic country's inhabitants feel that way, it's troubling for a democracy. It typically is one of the attributes of a totalitarian regime that its citizens don't dare to speak up freely.
There are plenty of markets that are free enough that the advantages (and disadvantages) of free markets are clear.
No there aren't, because people like you keep forgetting (or ignoring?) one of the main prerequisites that Adam Smith described for a "free market" to work: equal knowledge of buyer and seller.
For a free market to work (according to Smith), a seller must be aware of all "ingredients" (cost of work for production, production methods, cost of raw materials etc.) of a product in order to decide a) the product's worth and b) being able to compare it to similar products. The cheap, low quality knife might be good enough for me, whereas the professional cook goes for the high quality and expensive one.
So, be honest: for how many of the products you buy each day, do you know the exact raw material combination? Are you able to judge the toxic level of all chemicals used in those products? Do you know the medications given to the animal whose meat you're buying, all the herbicides and fertilizers used for those vegetables, how many kid's slave labor is involved in the production of that t-shirt and how many m of fresh water have been contaminated during the mining of these rare earth used in your new gadget?
No, the parent was correct: free market (as defined by Smith) does not exist. Not even close these days.
Last I checked, people get paid decent money and can move to new jobs and places. You don't have that under feudalism.
You should check your facts again. The fast majority of people in this world don't get paid decent money. Hwll, most of them don't even have enough to eat. And that's mainly because a few people like you and me get paid decent. We're basically living off of their lives in our "glory capitalism world".
I agree. I don't know German either, but you watch his speeches and suddenly want to join in whatever it is he is talking about. You have to wonder if anyone with that capability has ever been on the good guys team? Churchill was inspirational but not in the same fuck yeah way as Hitler.
Funny/intersting how speaking the language (natively) seems to make a fundamental difference. For me as a German, I find Hitler's speechs adhorent. Most likely because I also understand what he's saying.
Churchill OTOH is rather impressive to me with his sonor, cold-blooded but nonetheless emotional voice. And that by just listening to the sound of his voice, without spending any attention to what he's saying.
They are also the reason most websites on the Internet are free.
Not sure how old you are, but lots of us do remember the internet from long before Big Corporation Overlords discovered this "new-fangled web thingy". And it was always free ("free" both as in "free beer" and "free of ads"), although hosting did cost a shitload of money compared to nowadays. But people ("people", mind ya, not "money-grabbing corporations") put up free content nonetheless. Because they enjoy sharing stuff.
Remember: the same people that complain about ad-blockers are the people that make money off of the free contribution of others. That's the Facebook model: let users provide free content - we collect the money by selling their souls.
Excuse me using extrem vocablary, but this is utter bullshit!
Here's a quick run-down from the man responsible for the (media-created) "global cooling" of the 70s.
Besides the excellent explanation of what went wrong in the first place, how he found out about it and published his new findings immediately, the part I especially like about that article is the the final paragraph:
Ironically, inside the scientific world, this switch of sign of projected effects is viewed as precisely what responsible scientists must do when the facts change. Not only did I change my mind, but published almost immediately what had changed and how that played out over time. Scientists have no crystal ball, but we do have modeling methods that are the closest approximation available. They can't give us truth, but they can tell us the logical consequences of explicit assumptions. Those who update their conclusions explicitly as facts evolve are much more likely to be a credible source than those who stick to old stories for political consistency. Two cheers for the scientific method!
The Red Cross knew about the concentration camps in Germany during WWII, but did nothing to help them.
The Red Cross is strictly apolitical. Only this allows them to go and help everywhere. As soon as they would take sides in a conflict, they're out of (their) business. The more lunatic a leader is (think e.g. Assad/Syria these days), the more likely he would deny the RC to enter his country and help. And most of the time (the people in) these countries need help the most.
Not even that. For many text field, e.g. the Slashdot comment field, SQL statements can be a completely valid input. I coult be explaining to someone how to solve a problem in SQL, or I could be re-posting a "Little Bobby Tables" joke. All very valid, nothing malicious.
I'd say it depends on the page's content. I really can't think of a valid reason for SQL statements or Javascript snippets in pages dealing about celebrity A or pet B or most other fields of interest outside of IT.
They want to build it upon XMPP, according to the Ars article I read earlier this day.
Re: It was already a dangerous site to visit ...
on
PHP.net Compromised
·
· Score: 1
Making these two operators the same symbol just leads to developer confusion and a complicated context-sensitive parser. See also: any BASIC programmer that ever tried to learn C.
Not true. Assignment in BASIC is Let (or Set) A = B, whereas comparison is A = B.
I agree that the unfortunate fact, that for most current BASIC dialects the 'Let' is optional, results in the confusion you were referring to. But you can't blame a language for terrible/lazy programmers.
The simple fact of the matter is that the US is recovering from one of it's worst recessions ever. You can't cherry pick a point in time, and claim victory.
That recession you're referring to... don't you think Europe suffered that as well? Only to be followed by the current Euro crisis (which is a direct result of aforementioned recession, mind you).
Germany... is slightly more touchy about issues pertaining to surveillance and the general topic of totalitarianism, for some reason.
Yes, we (the German people) are. No, we (the German government) are not. The later will happily share whatever they acquire with its "friends" in Europe and overseas.
Technically both NSA and BND/Verfassungschutz are not spying on their own people... but if the BND spies on Americans and the NSA spies on Germans and both swap their findings, all laws were respected.
I'm not making this weird shit up, that's actually how our government argued in this affair. Granted the wording they used was of course more not-so-obvious politian-speak. But that's what they said.
In most countries of the world, if a non-parent gave an 8-year-old access to the same level of porn as GTA 5's strip club, they would be severely punished.
You left out an important word. It should read 'In most unenlightened countries of the world...
We've got the same amount of "porn" i.e. in shower gel commercials in the afternoon TV program. And no-one is severely harmed (kids) or punished (adults).
This could be a (partial) answer to sunday's Ask Slashdot question, "Attracting Developers To Abandonware?":
I can't code in any meaningful way, nor do I aspire to. I could easily pay for a supported version of icewm, but I can't personally pay someone enough to keep it alive. I'd love it if someone took a personal interest in the code, to ensure that it remains up to date, or to make it run on Wayland or whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes and No.
I disagree. I'm not a native English speaker, but most music I listen to has English lyrics. Now - I've even got a hard time to understand the lyrics in my native language. For English songs, I really need to concentrate hard to understand the lyrics. Therefore they could very well sing "LaLaLa" (OK, with some variations ...) and it wouldn't change much the way I feel for/perceive a song. It's more about the phrasing, rhythm and melody. The voice is just another instrument - and a very versatile one. Oh, and did I mention that I absolutely love monumental choirs? :)
That's not right. Our expression is "(Aber) Man hat schon Pferde vor der Apotheke kotzen gesehen." A translation might be "(But) Horses have been seen vomitting in front of a pharmacy". It's a phrase that's added after describing a very unlikely situation, which may nonetheless happen, e.g. "Given X and Y, I doubt that Z will happen ... but horses have been seen ..."
Sure. Here you go. Source of that URL, an article of the German IT publisher/news site Heise.
That article is about kino.to, a streaming "service" for pirated movies, to which you had to subscribe for a flat monthly fee. It is assumed (and that's what the Süddeutsche article linked there states), that anybody subscribing to that service had to know - by using common sense - that it can only be an illegal streaming portal and that streaming of illegal content is, well - illegal. And you had to be a suscriber in order to use that service.
That's a bit different from the current case.
... or pick a religion which hasn't a contract with the German state for collecting taxes (hint: any non-christian religion).
In thousand years? Just ask your replicator (aka "3D printer" these days) to create one ...
I don't think that is the point. It's rather how many feel the same (rational or not) and censor themselves. If a big enough part of a constitutional democratic country's inhabitants feel that way, it's troubling for a democracy. It typically is one of the attributes of a totalitarian regime that its citizens don't dare to speak up freely.
No there aren't, because people like you keep forgetting (or ignoring?) one of the main prerequisites that Adam Smith described for a "free market" to work: equal knowledge of buyer and seller.
For a free market to work (according to Smith), a seller must be aware of all "ingredients" (cost of work for production, production methods, cost of raw materials etc.) of a product in order to decide a) the product's worth and b) being able to compare it to similar products. The cheap, low quality knife might be good enough for me, whereas the professional cook goes for the high quality and expensive one.
So, be honest: for how many of the products you buy each day, do you know the exact raw material combination? Are you able to judge the toxic level of all chemicals used in those products? Do you know the medications given to the animal whose meat you're buying, all the herbicides and fertilizers used for those vegetables, how many kid's slave labor is involved in the production of that t-shirt and how many m of fresh water have been contaminated during the mining of these rare earth used in your new gadget?
No, the parent was correct: free market (as defined by Smith) does not exist. Not even close these days.
You should check your facts again. The fast majority of people in this world don't get paid decent money. Hwll, most of them don't even have enough to eat. And that's mainly because a few people like you and me get paid decent. We're basically living off of their lives in our "glory capitalism world".
Funny/intersting how speaking the language (natively) seems to make a fundamental difference. For me as a German, I find Hitler's speechs adhorent. Most likely because I also understand what he's saying.
Churchill OTOH is rather impressive to me with his sonor, cold-blooded but nonetheless emotional voice. And that by just listening to the sound of his voice, without spending any attention to what he's saying.
Not sure how old you are, but lots of us do remember the internet from long before Big Corporation Overlords discovered this "new-fangled web thingy". And it was always free ("free" both as in "free beer" and "free of ads"), although hosting did cost a shitload of money compared to nowadays. But people ("people", mind ya, not "money-grabbing corporations") put up free content nonetheless. Because they enjoy sharing stuff.
Remember: the same people that complain about ad-blockers are the people that make money off of the free contribution of others. That's the Facebook model: let users provide free content - we collect the money by selling their souls.
Excuse me using extrem vocablary, but this is utter bullshit!
Here's a quick run-down from the man responsible for the (media-created) "global cooling" of the 70s.
Besides the excellent explanation of what went wrong in the first place, how he found out about it and published his new findings immediately, the part I especially like about that article is the the final paragraph:
The Red Cross is strictly apolitical. Only this allows them to go and help everywhere. As soon as they would take sides in a conflict, they're out of (their) business. The more lunatic a leader is (think e.g. Assad/Syria these days), the more likely he would deny the RC to enter his country and help. And most of the time (the people in) these countries need help the most.
Haven't tried that in a long time, but it used to be:
The admittedly weird and counter-intuitive thing is to be online to go offline ...
I'd say it depends on the page's content. I really can't think of a valid reason for SQL statements or Javascript snippets in pages dealing about celebrity A or pet B or most other fields of interest outside of IT.
They want to build it upon XMPP, according to the Ars article I read earlier this day.
Not true. Assignment in BASIC is Let (or Set) A = B, whereas comparison is A = B.
I agree that the unfortunate fact, that for most current BASIC dialects the 'Let' is optional, results in the confusion you were referring to. But you can't blame a language for terrible/lazy programmers.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: No, not i.e. in Germany, where you automatically posses the copyright of your work. No need to declare it somewhere.
Conclusion: even back then, it depended on where the author(s) was/were from.
Much to my dismay, my own country, Germany.
That recession you're referring to ... don't you think Europe suffered that as well? Only to be followed by the current Euro crisis (which is a direct result of aforementioned recession, mind you).
Yes, we (the German people) are. No, we (the German government) are not. The later will happily share whatever they acquire with its "friends" in Europe and overseas.
Technically both NSA and BND/Verfassungschutz are not spying on their own people ... but if the BND spies on Americans and the NSA spies on Germans and both swap their findings, all laws were respected.
I'm not making this weird shit up, that's actually how our government argued in this affair. Granted the wording they used was of course more not-so-obvious politian-speak. But that's what they said.
You left out an important word. It should read 'In most unenlightened countries of the world ...
We've got the same amount of "porn" i.e. in shower gel commercials in the afternoon TV program. And no-one is severely harmed (kids) or punished (adults).
Ever heard of the Fraunhofer Institute (of MP3 fame) or its sibling, the Max Planck Society?
These are dedicated research centers, partly financed by the tax payer. Their very goal is to invent and create patents and license them.
This could be a (partial) answer to sunday's Ask Slashdot question, "Attracting Developers To Abandonware?":