It isn't about what kind of person the robber is, or is not. It is about what kind of person you want yourself or our society to be. There are all sorts of people who deserve death by your criteria, is this really the best approach to take for ourselves?
Have a flea market table without paying for a 'business license', put up a shed or BBQ pit in my backyard without paying for a 'construction license', buy an ephedrine-based cold medicine without being put on a government watchlist, open an iced cream parlor without paying for a 'milk license' (NOT a health inspection, simply permission to sell a milk-based product), drive without a seatbelt, ride a bike without a helmet, stay out after 10 PM (as a teenager), buy a super large soft drink, tell your psychologist or guidance counselor about violent fantasies without being reported to a government agency. I could go on all day. Freedom isn't always about the huge things, it is also about simply living your life and being left alone as long as you weren't attacking people. Many of those freedoms are long gone, and the worst thing to me is that you can't think of any. Democracy ends with a standing ovation, "for the children!"
I thought the same thing when I read about some of the new laws, both passed and proposed among the states, which require a psychologist to report any patient who hints at rampage fantasies or violent thoughts or some such. Awesome, now people who need help will never confide in their psychologists. And naive innocent people who do so will be marked for life as 'violent tendencies'. Really, who hasn't had the occasional violent fantasy?
It is a real peeve of mine how laws get passed with absolutely zero thought given to what the consequences will be. People change their behavior, but so many of these dumb bills just assume that they won't.
It is normal to target 'something' that seems achievable rather than confront difficult problems that are less amenable to solutions. It would be better to focus on mental health and prevention issues. But we know so little about that, and frankly who do you trust to make a decision on who is mentally ill? So instead people focus on 'doing something' that it seems like they can achieve, even if it is mostly pointless.
An interesting question I hadn't thought about. I know the math behind it all won't allow coins to be mined after a certain time, Is the expectation that the supply will slowly dwindle, causing a long term deflation trend?
There is a bit of a tautology here. If a government issues it, it is defined as "money" if some other entity issues it, it is a "coupon" or whatever. What TFA misses, I think, is that anything can be used as a basis of exchange. I can buy and sell things by denominating the exchange in widgets, well there you go. If I later convert the widgets to US dollars, well that's no difference. May as well say 'world of warcraft gold' for widgets, or whatever you like, in that example.
It is an excellent point that since government require protection money to be paid in their own preferred currency, there is a huge advantage in terms of acceptance in the marketplace. This does not mean, however, that other mediums of exchange cannot exist. My main point is that the word "money" is an arbitrary one unless one includes 'issued by governments for payment of protection money' in the definition. Otherwise, me trading babysitting stints with my neighbors also counts as money.
Note from the article "Removed reference to Google stating the app was not in violation of TOS – this was a mischaracterization of Google’s statement."
What does "a leader in the market" mean? Clearly you don't mean the top slot only, since there is already more than one smartphone maker. The parent used the term 'number one' so your point seems moot. Blackberry *is* a leader in the market, didn't you hear they are number two in South Africa? It's like saying 'one of the top somethings' well ANY of the things is 'one of the top' except the very bottom one. It all depends on where you draw that arbitrary line.
That is what all the opponents of assisted suicide are doing: threatening to kill people who don't share their views. Since all these people have validated the principle of using violent coercion to force people to do what they don't want to do with their own lives, Mr Adams is merely returning the favor.
Somewhere I read about studies that found that altruism in birds or something was based on the likelihood of the recipients being genetically similar to the altruist. i.e. the bird might sacrifice for 2d cousins or of course its own children, but for total strangers no way. The idea was that altruism was a mechanism to provide for one's genes to survive.
I don't see how this explains altruism, this explains self interest. It's no different than chimps taking turns picking lice off each other. (Disclaimer: I had chimp-like ancestors. Also, I am not saying chimps and the people in TFA are equivalent). Altruism is jumping on a live hand grenade, or taking on a predator while the rest of the troop flees.
Yes, he was saying "So much is at stake here that we won't consider a plan for failure. Failure is so bad that it isn't valuable to consider" IN a business setting, failure of the enterprise is a viable option. Costs might become too high, business environment or regulations might change, etc. For Apollo 13 these weren't options. Either bring these guys home or we all pack up and go home.
Regardless, if a manager said it to me at my work I might consider running.
“If residents don’t like their government, they can and should move,” he writes. “The design is all ‘exit,’ no ‘voice.’”
Any business can tell you the value of switching costs. Once you reel them in, it is expensive to move. So, even though another city-state might be better, people will still not move since the cost of moving, even assuming the State doesn't actively interfere with exit taxes or similar measures, would prevent most from moving. This is why retail chains all want you to sign up for their cursed club cards, to try to create switching costs that will keep you around even though they suck.
Plus, we don't live in Bruce Sterling's cladist space utopia, there are limited options for moving in space while stuck on Earth's surface, even ignoring the costs. Why don't all those North Koreans just move?
Perhaps these fellows have answers to these criticisms, I haven't spent all day reading their FAQ or anything.
Regarding the "nothing to hide" argument: there have been cases of NSA employees using these systems to stalk and harass ex-lovers. Not to mention cases of mistaken identity, typos on warrants, and simple incompetence. Legal protections and limits on government power aren't about having something to hide. They are about the fact that government is no more trustworthy than any other organization.
Please provide a citation regarding subsidies to oil and gas companies, in the US at least. Perhaps I am making a geographical assumption, but the article is about the US. As far as I can tell there aren't any subsidies to oil/gas companies, unless you count tax breaks and other things that every company gets.
I'm not a coder, but I've seen similar effects in system configurations like firewall policies. In those cases it was due to change control, it is easier to get approved and to roll back something that is added onto the existing structure without changing it, than it is to rework the whole thing. I wondered if that was a factor in your experiences in the developer world.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't about what kind of person the robber is, or is not. It is about what kind of person you want yourself or our society to be. There are all sorts of people who deserve death by your criteria, is this really the best approach to take for ourselves?
Well a fair point, that isn't a Federal law, it is one that many towns (but not all) have enacted. Just Google 'teenage curfews' for various articles.
Boiled down: about one-third of the American press are chickens, about two-thirds are not.
A perfect summary.
Have a flea market table without paying for a 'business license', put up a shed or BBQ pit in my backyard without paying for a 'construction license', buy an ephedrine-based cold medicine without being put on a government watchlist, open an iced cream parlor without paying for a 'milk license' (NOT a health inspection, simply permission to sell a milk-based product), drive without a seatbelt, ride a bike without a helmet, stay out after 10 PM (as a teenager), buy a super large soft drink, tell your psychologist or guidance counselor about violent fantasies without being reported to a government agency. I could go on all day. Freedom isn't always about the huge things, it is also about simply living your life and being left alone as long as you weren't attacking people. Many of those freedoms are long gone, and the worst thing to me is that you can't think of any. Democracy ends with a standing ovation, "for the children!"
This isn't about dropping POTS in favor of wireless. It is about using VOIP instead of POTS, wiring still required.
I thought the same thing when I read about some of the new laws, both passed and proposed among the states, which require a psychologist to report any patient who hints at rampage fantasies or violent thoughts or some such. Awesome, now people who need help will never confide in their psychologists. And naive innocent people who do so will be marked for life as 'violent tendencies'. Really, who hasn't had the occasional violent fantasy?
It is a real peeve of mine how laws get passed with absolutely zero thought given to what the consequences will be. People change their behavior, but so many of these dumb bills just assume that they won't.
It is normal to target 'something' that seems achievable rather than confront difficult problems that are less amenable to solutions. It would be better to focus on mental health and prevention issues. But we know so little about that, and frankly who do you trust to make a decision on who is mentally ill? So instead people focus on 'doing something' that it seems like they can achieve, even if it is mostly pointless.
An interesting question I hadn't thought about. I know the math behind it all won't allow coins to be mined after a certain time, Is the expectation that the supply will slowly dwindle, causing a long term deflation trend?
Silk Road is back up under new management.
There is a bit of a tautology here. If a government issues it, it is defined as "money" if some other entity issues it, it is a "coupon" or whatever. What TFA misses, I think, is that anything can be used as a basis of exchange. I can buy and sell things by denominating the exchange in widgets, well there you go. If I later convert the widgets to US dollars, well that's no difference. May as well say 'world of warcraft gold' for widgets, or whatever you like, in that example. It is an excellent point that since government require protection money to be paid in their own preferred currency, there is a huge advantage in terms of acceptance in the marketplace. This does not mean, however, that other mediums of exchange cannot exist. My main point is that the word "money" is an arbitrary one unless one includes 'issued by governments for payment of protection money' in the definition. Otherwise, me trading babysitting stints with my neighbors also counts as money.
Note from the article "Removed reference to Google stating the app was not in violation of TOS – this was a mischaracterization of Google’s statement."
This doesn't' seem all that voluntary to me. My reaction was yeah sure you go ahead and remove it, why should we do you any favors?
What does "a leader in the market" mean? Clearly you don't mean the top slot only, since there is already more than one smartphone maker. The parent used the term 'number one' so your point seems moot. Blackberry *is* a leader in the market, didn't you hear they are number two in South Africa? It's like saying 'one of the top somethings' well ANY of the things is 'one of the top' except the very bottom one. It all depends on where you draw that arbitrary line.
Fair enough, what she doesn't establish is any reason at all why Mr Adams' father should be held hostage to what someone else might do.
That is what all the opponents of assisted suicide are doing: threatening to kill people who don't share their views. Since all these people have validated the principle of using violent coercion to force people to do what they don't want to do with their own lives, Mr Adams is merely returning the favor.
Another point, it seems TFA doesn't use the word "altruism" it uses "reciprocity". So jeers for the submitter on that point.
Somewhere I read about studies that found that altruism in birds or something was based on the likelihood of the recipients being genetically similar to the altruist. i.e. the bird might sacrifice for 2d cousins or of course its own children, but for total strangers no way. The idea was that altruism was a mechanism to provide for one's genes to survive.
I don't see how this explains altruism, this explains self interest. It's no different than chimps taking turns picking lice off each other. (Disclaimer: I had chimp-like ancestors. Also, I am not saying chimps and the people in TFA are equivalent). Altruism is jumping on a live hand grenade, or taking on a predator while the rest of the troop flees.
Yes, he was saying "So much is at stake here that we won't consider a plan for failure. Failure is so bad that it isn't valuable to consider" IN a business setting, failure of the enterprise is a viable option. Costs might become too high, business environment or regulations might change, etc. For Apollo 13 these weren't options. Either bring these guys home or we all pack up and go home.
Regardless, if a manager said it to me at my work I might consider running.
“If residents don’t like their government, they can and should move,” he writes. “The design is all ‘exit,’ no ‘voice.’”
Any business can tell you the value of switching costs. Once you reel them in, it is expensive to move. So, even though another city-state might be better, people will still not move since the cost of moving, even assuming the State doesn't actively interfere with exit taxes or similar measures, would prevent most from moving. This is why retail chains all want you to sign up for their cursed club cards, to try to create switching costs that will keep you around even though they suck. Plus, we don't live in Bruce Sterling's cladist space utopia, there are limited options for moving in space while stuck on Earth's surface, even ignoring the costs. Why don't all those North Koreans just move? Perhaps these fellows have answers to these criticisms, I haven't spent all day reading their FAQ or anything.
Regarding the "nothing to hide" argument: there have been cases of NSA employees using these systems to stalk and harass ex-lovers. Not to mention cases of mistaken identity, typos on warrants, and simple incompetence. Legal protections and limits on government power aren't about having something to hide. They are about the fact that government is no more trustworthy than any other organization.
AH, nvm Ill read up on it myself http://www.nei.org/corporatesite/media/filefolder/60_Years_of_Energy_Incentives_-_Analysis_of_Federal_Expenditures_for_Energy_Development_-_1950-2010.pdf
Please provide a citation regarding subsidies to oil and gas companies, in the US at least. Perhaps I am making a geographical assumption, but the article is about the US. As far as I can tell there aren't any subsidies to oil/gas companies, unless you count tax breaks and other things that every company gets.
Would insects count as meat?
I'm not a coder, but I've seen similar effects in system configurations like firewall policies. In those cases it was due to change control, it is easier to get approved and to roll back something that is added onto the existing structure without changing it, than it is to rework the whole thing. I wondered if that was a factor in your experiences in the developer world.