"If you didn't already know that, please read it again and understand it before proceeding."
Well there is that effect of a people taking bad language features and accepting them as good things because they can do very clever things with them which are un-intended conscequences of language features.
The new Java generics are not a macro capability. They are actually integrated into the language and are just a syntax with symantics. There are no macro/pre-processor side effects nor opportunities like C++ Templates have.
Some of the issues you might consider are what object oriented programming means vs. what strong typing means. There are some languages that combine the two but others that don't. They are different features with different goals.
Smalltalk is Object oriented with objects having a type and respond to services. Its clean, expressive and tremendously powerful. I would say many times more powerful than C++ in its power to express ideas simply and cleanly. Variables don't have type, they don't need to, objects have type from the class they are an instance of. You don't need templates, you never needed templates.In the object world template are meaningless. You do, however, have to adopt very good discipline to not have runtime errors, but those runtime errors are relatively soft and harmless.
In a Dynamically Typed language like Smalltalk, you can have a collection of object (of different types, in object terms thats just different objects) without trouble. Maybe you have different business objects that you want to queue up and process. You don't need to have them all from the same class (or ancestor class, base class for you C++ only programmers) to put them into the queue. You don't need to have them service all the same messages to put them into the queue (this is a requirement for strongly typed languages, you use downcasting to get around that). You can ask the object what it is and route it or use double dispatching to do that in a more OOPs way. That is a much more powerful scheme that the 2 dimesional one that the strong typing places opon you. Your entire system's design is controlled fundementally by this strong typing requirement. You give up so much power to have the safety of strong typing. Programms written in OOP's system with strong typing and without are very very different.
So strong typing in C++ came from C and is a non-object oriented technique/restriction on the language to try and move some potential programming errors from run-time back to compile time. So I am sure we would all agree that this feature in C and in C++ has made those coding environments runtime bug free. (pause for laughter).
Templates are a way for C++ to have a facility that to not have to copy and retype every damn queue, stack, list, tree.. structure if you wanted to use that structure again. Make no mistake, C++ did not have this feature originally. They were a response from the OOP community that the language had thereby not very useful. OOPs which promises re-use wasn't there yet. The language actually fought re-use. It was added so that it could patch a serious deficency in the language against other languages like Smalltalk that were competing for OO programmers back then. The strong typing of C prevented C++ from being a serious language because of this lack of re-use. So Template were needed to make C++ viable and people have found that the way there were implemented that you could use it for things it was not intended for. Which means of course that there is no hope of fixing the problems with template (oh sorry features) which allow it to be used for compile time metaprogramming. It as a language feature acts outside the language more like a pre-processor exention.
Java on the other hand adopted a more purely Object Oriented approach, with every class having a common ancestor class (in C++ you for some reason call it a base class, whats that all about, well windows calls them folders not directories..) the Object class which
Our forefathers didn't trust each other. They knew that opposing interests and herd behavior were dangerous things and devised a three part government that allowed things to go slowly enough and within sight of all (for the most part) as checks and balances to loosing our freedoms (current government take note).
One of the most successful business technologies in the past few centuries, that made business possible, was the creation of double entry bookkeeping, with its built in checks and balances. But even that is not enough, companies are audited by independent auditors (we usually independent, see what happens when they are not).
Without these transparancies of process and independent oversight we would have many more, Savings and Loan scandals, or Enron's or WorldComs. Even with those in place, greedy people will be constantly trying and finding ways around those controls.
So let's have a non-transparent centralized computer tally of votes. Lets require that citizens understand and or have the electronic technology to vote. We don't need to maintain our freedoms that badly do we?
Today they annouced another round of hackable exploits to Microsoft Office software. Also, today Taiwan is being attacked digitally from China.
Electronic technology itself isn't the answer. Encryption does not protect against attack, it only slows it down. Case in point, I have heard it said that the DES standard was adjusted to be fewer bits so only the large NSA computers could crack it. The government is nervous about any technology that prevents them the ability to spy on information or individuals. So then only the holders of the most computer resources could crack your vote. Do you trust who is in control of policy there now? Or more importanly do you trust who is going to be in control of those resources in the future. That is the fundemental pessimism that was built into our three branches of government for good reason. Any solution to the voting problem, and we do have a serious voting problem as exhibited by the last presidential election, needs to include transparent checks and balances, needs to be simple and non-technological for the voter, and needs to have the eyes of many people of differing views watching the process like a hawk. Our very future is at stake and we can't let it be controlled out of sight or hackable, by anyone.
As the thread a few days ago about Microsoft adding "Security" Thread 1Thread 2to the new MS Messenger versions which will require older versions to be upgraded but lock out third party IRC products. It seems that they are setting up a DMCA "protection circumvention" legal grounds for shutting down other services using their MSM service or to allow them to go after them with law suits or even denial of service attacks legally. Looks like things aren't going to be friendly for very much longer.
Lets see now.. the saftey monitoring system of a Nuclear plant was down for hours. Who within a thousand miles down wind of that plant or of the generation that could be effected by the fallout would agree that the virus in this circumstance had any community positive value.
There is no ethical or moral reason to release into the environment intentionally.
Finding exploits and letting companies know so that systems can be hardened is a good thing.
Lets say the same "ethic" was used against automobiles. Say finding rocks or bullets or gasoline whatever to cause the cars to stop of fail. So that auto manufactures had to harden their vehicles over and over until everyone was driving a tank.
Essentially this is what is happening in Iraq against our troops and essentially the virus and worm creators ARE terroists and their fruits effect the lives of innocent people.
Which kind of world do you want to live in. Always wearing a flack jacket and helmet and driving a tank, because some unethical idiots get off on seeding anonoumous distruction.
Lets just be clear about the process and the effect and the who lives in this world and whether any of us want to live looking over our shoulder all the time.
"Now that's what I call a good use of the technology!"
Lets look a little deeper into the consequences though. My mother was a librarian. Given a self service Library, no Librarians or fewer certainly. One might argue that low paid non-librarian staff would be fired but they are someone mother as well.
If the stores adopt the tags, fewer Shop workers. Where will they go. How will they make a living to get the money to buy from the shop.
We have an ecology here, any change like this changes the equilibrium point and there will be many hidden costs.
So be careful when you claim a good use of technology.
The tracking capabilities of the technology are quite high. Look at the recent story in slashdot on a Florida (I believe) city that just stopped using hidden face recognition cameras to try and identify criminals. It didnt work thank heavens or they would be up all over. If one Law enforcement group will try this, they will try and use and pass legistation to use this technology for similar purposes.
It much easier. According to DMCA (music of Village People in the background), if you have some security system build in to protect your copyrighted material, it is illegal for someone to circumvent it. Case in point.
That is why the are building in "security features" in an attempt to set up the garage door opener defense. It seems quite clear from the wording of the new fixes.
It much easier. According to DMCA (music of Village People in the background), if you have some security system build in to protect your copyrighted material, it is illegal for someone to circumvent it. Case in point.
Yep blatant flame bait. (and I specifically didnt mention the Canadians seeing that I work for a Canadian company, oh wait, they bought us, out sourced us, and are now exporting our servers and work up North, but who's counting, and who's going to feed my faminly, my mother is dead by the way you insensitive clod).
I think you miss the point, there is legitimate use for government, just look at the countries that dont have one Liberia for instance. It has taken a "big" presence to stop the turmoil. Here in this country, if we didnt have a big benevolent government we would still have slavery.
You use your mastercared but the dollars you trade have a commonly accepted value for trade. This is mediated by the government (through the banks). Government keeps the wheels turning, people reasonably civil and nice. The avenues of travel and communications open and a system of laws and enforcement to help keep things rolling along. For any country with resonable size populations and especially urban areas, this is necesarry. It has many forms but is necesarry. If you can show one counter example of a population of size that functions without a government doing these things (in the last 1000 years) then I'll consider you have a point. Sure we can do the necesarry things better, we always can. But not doing them at all is a scary proposition. We have seen governtments break down in Africa and Asia and it is a sad thing for the people there and ultimately for their neighbors and eventually, all of us.
Dont thow out the baby because the bath water has crap in it. Toilet train the baby.
Well its true there are other things tax dollars go for but that is small potatoes compared to the larger functions of government.
They can limit govenment to whats necesarry, oh I mean we can limit govenrment. But that takes a vote. Now the current rage it to limit the spending to only exploitist short term business and rich friendly subsidies, not to mention curbing freedoms and fredom of speech, oh and yes, lets steal a presidential election or two. You can see that you dont always get what you vote for.
Now for Government programs, especially fundemental research. That is a public spending that has paid for itself over and over and over. Because the fruits of that have been publicly owned and we all benefit. Lets take corporate reseach. Lets patent gene (for god's sake I have a few and I'll be damned if I pay royalties for them like SCO's license fee's for Linux). Or Drug reseach. Look at the greed there and the corporate greed tax for drugs here.
I always liked the article by I believe it was Alan Turing talking about his model of intellegence. He hypothoized building a TM to model intellegence, one that you programmed to tell the truth. You ask it if it can think. If it says "yes" do you believe it.
I am also reminded of the story of the Taoist and the Confusian standing on a bridge looking down into the water.
The Taoist says "How wonderful it is to be a fish swimming in a cool brook".
The Confusian looks at him and says "You can't know how it feels to be a fish swiming in a cool brook!".
The Taoist looks at him and says "How do you know?"
Well it happened to us with transistors, then IC's and even robotics, started here and in Europe. Its about time for turn about. But with all the economic clout with their ownership of most of our media and lots of Hawaii, they will get legislation passed to prevent us from copying there stuff.
As long as you travel the roads, and get your mail, and don't have to fight off marauding gangs from the nearby hills, and have faith in the barter notes your trade for food. Don't you want people to be able to read that "No Tespassing" sign on your barbed wire fence. I think so.
Or buy and Island, raise your own food and protect your own borders from pirates. Maybe you can make and sell stamps to get money to pay for your tv set.
Here the software which was copyrighted had a security feature that a competitor for a universal remote exploited. They closed them out of some big contracts by using copyrighted security feature circumvention and DCMA. Thats why they are doing this. To set up to use the DCMA against users of their system.
There are whispers of a time in the Great Before when people goofed off at work WITHOUT having web access! There were entire "coffee breaks" where not a single email was sent or a single http request made! I know! It boggles the mind. Turns out, lazy people have always been lazy!
Well it is a cultural thing, go to some cultures and nothing gets done, nothing much is expected. These societies still exists, you don't need to live that stressful, "you took 12 min for a break your fired" life. Thats not what life is about. Come on you business people your getting too greedy and the culture is telling you its ok. Its not.
Well its thats a true cost savings and one that many businesses practiced, by eliminating jobs of people close to retirement. They have several better solutions now. No retirement benefits and/ or outsourcing, you choose. No wait you have not choice.
Besides if by pension you mean social security then those people have paid for that privilege. It is just windfall profit for the government if they die sooner than they can collect on the funds they have kept in the governments safe hands against their retired years.
If it is truely a company pension then yes this is another form of legalized gambling where the insurance company benefits. But in either way it is not a societal cost. (well only if you take into account the governments stealing of SS funds for other things for many years and now we all have to pay for their misdeeds).
Yes very interesting fact. If Nevada were to rethink their tax stance then would they start getting into advertizements or relax restrictions on advertizements to increase revenues? Would they start issuing Pimp mobiles to state workers?
Regulating but not taxing seems to be a smart balanced approach to the matter.
After all there is no reason any particular thing is Taxed. Its just a way for the government go get funding.
Some of the problems with government taxation is it is based on economic activity or property values. But then if they fall off they are unwilling to take the fair portion they allotted themselves which then unmasks the "fairness" arguments they used to pass the taxes in the first place.
So little time and so many things to tax, what to do.
1. Gambling is a personal choice and should not be restricted.
2. Governments should get a percentage.
Prohibition showed us that some moral (religious) judgements go against the will of the people and that opens up an industry for gangsters. This has been shown to be true.
One of the benefits of legalizing alchohol was to make those gangsters find other businesses go to into. Drugs for example and gambling. Not sure that there was a long term benifit here.
The cost of course for readily available alcohol is alcoholism and all the assocaited trama and cost to the individual and society. Some of that spills over into lost lives and higher crime rates.
We have the same problem with drug addiction as it can ruin lives (especially when the addiction is so expensive because of being illegal) and the increase in crime, and with some drugs violence.
Gambling has the a similar associated cost of gambling addiction which has shown up in states that have legalized gambing with the associated cost to individuals, society and increase in crime.
We have as a population (here in the States) decided that the cost to the individual and society for tabacco smoking is such that we have decided to restrict its use. Mainly because the effects of second hand smoke and the increase in health problems raise everybodies insurance cost. Essentially we all pay for the habits of a few.
I think this is generally true but not generally perceived.
So there is a cost to allowing gambling. I have a problem with the government getting a vested interest in what could be viewed as also having a negitive societal cost. Seems like dirty money to me.
The chances of getting good enough weather all the way around is probably the largest problem. But then too to carry the fuel the size of the craft would probably be so large that there would be contention that it was just a pilotless plane and not a model.
Of course if you could get it solar powered and hitch a ride on the jet stream maybe.
Slashdot Mirror
"If you didn't already know that, please read it again and understand it before proceeding."
.. structure if you wanted to use that structure again. Make no mistake, C++ did not have this feature originally. They were a response from the OOP community that the language had thereby not very useful. OOPs which promises re-use wasn't there yet. The language actually fought re-use. It was added so that it could patch a serious deficency in the language against other languages like Smalltalk that were competing for OO programmers back then. The strong typing of C prevented C++ from being a serious language because of this lack of re-use. So Template were needed to make C++ viable and people have found that the way there were implemented that you could use it for things it was not intended for. Which means of course that there is no hope of fixing the problems with template (oh sorry features) which allow it to be used for compile time metaprogramming. It as a language feature acts outside the language more like a pre-processor exention.
Well there is that effect of a people taking bad language features and accepting them as good things because they can do very clever things with them which are un-intended conscequences of language features.
The new Java generics are not a macro capability. They are actually integrated into the language and are just a syntax with symantics. There are no macro/pre-processor side effects nor opportunities like C++ Templates have.
Some of the issues you might consider are what object oriented programming means vs. what strong typing means. There are some languages that combine the two but others that don't. They are different features with different goals.
Smalltalk is Object oriented with objects having a type and respond to services. Its clean, expressive and tremendously powerful. I would say many times more powerful than C++ in its power to express ideas simply and cleanly. Variables don't have type, they don't need to, objects have type from the class they are an instance of. You don't need templates, you never needed templates.In the object world template are meaningless. You do, however, have to adopt very good discipline to not have runtime errors, but those runtime errors are relatively soft and harmless.
In a Dynamically Typed language like Smalltalk, you can have a collection of object (of different types, in object terms thats just different objects) without trouble. Maybe you have different business objects that you want to queue up and process. You don't need to have them all from the same class (or ancestor class, base class for you C++ only programmers) to put them into the queue. You don't need to have them service all the same messages to put them into the queue (this is a requirement for strongly typed languages, you use downcasting to get around that). You can ask the object what it is and route it or use double dispatching to do that in a more OOPs way. That is a much more powerful scheme that the 2 dimesional one that the strong typing places opon you. Your entire system's design is controlled fundementally by this strong typing requirement. You give up so much power to have the safety of strong typing. Programms written in OOP's system with strong typing and without are very very different.
So strong typing in C++ came from C and is a non-object oriented technique/restriction on the language to try and move some potential programming errors from run-time back to compile time. So I am sure we would all agree that this feature in C and in C++ has made those coding environments runtime bug free. (pause for laughter).
Templates are a way for C++ to have a facility that to not have to copy and retype every damn queue, stack, list, tree
Java on the other hand adopted a more purely Object Oriented approach, with every class having a common ancestor class (in C++ you for some reason call it a base class, whats that all about, well windows calls them folders not directories..) the Object class which
In here early 30's she will become a record company executive and sue children for $150000 /per song because they did not get their nickle from a sale.
Why suing college students for illegal music downloading is right
I was impressed with this lawyers lack of any facts in her argument. It certainly shows that they are doing there philosophical homework.
Why suing college students for illegal music downloading is right
I was impressed with this lawyers lack of any facts in her argument. It certainly shows that they are doing there philosophical homework.
Another slashdot vote for Electornic paranoia.
Austrailia story
Our forefathers didn't trust each other. They knew that opposing interests and herd behavior were dangerous things and devised a three part government that allowed things to go slowly enough and within sight of all (for the most part) as checks and balances to loosing our freedoms (current government take note).
One of the most successful business technologies in the past few centuries, that made business possible, was the creation of double entry bookkeeping, with its built in checks and balances. But even that is not enough, companies are audited by independent auditors (we usually independent, see what happens when they are not).
Without these transparancies of process and independent oversight we would have many more, Savings and Loan scandals, or Enron's or WorldComs. Even with those in place, greedy people will be constantly trying and finding ways around those controls.
So let's have a non-transparent centralized computer tally of votes. Lets require that citizens understand and or have the electronic technology to vote. We don't need to maintain our freedoms that badly do we?
Today they annouced another round of hackable exploits to Microsoft Office software. Also, today Taiwan is being attacked digitally from China.
Electronic technology itself isn't the answer. Encryption does not protect against attack, it only slows it down. Case in point, I have heard it said that the DES standard was adjusted to be fewer bits so only the large NSA computers could crack it. The government is nervous about any technology that prevents them the ability to spy on information or individuals. So then only the holders of the most computer resources could crack your vote. Do you trust who is in control of policy there now? Or more importanly do you trust who is going to be in control of those resources in the future. That is the fundemental pessimism that was built into our three branches of government for good reason. Any solution to the voting problem, and we do have a serious voting problem as exhibited by the last presidential election, needs to include transparent checks and balances, needs to be simple and non-technological for the voter, and needs to have the eyes of many people of differing views watching the process like a hawk. Our very future is at stake and we can't let it be controlled out of sight or hackable, by anyone.
As the thread a few days ago about Microsoft adding "Security" Thread 1 Thread 2to the new MS Messenger versions which will require older versions to be upgraded but lock out third party IRC products. It seems that they are setting up a DMCA "protection circumvention" legal grounds for shutting down other services using their MSM service or to allow them to go after them with law suits or even denial of service attacks legally. Looks like things aren't going to be friendly for very much longer.
"the community as a whole benefits from publicised viruses in the long term while those infected are negatively affected in the short term."
3 22 7&mode=thread&tid=109&tid=126&tid=128&tid=172&tid= 187
I think there is another view. There was an article recently on slashdot about the effect of virus's and worms.
A Nuclear plant, and trains were effected.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/21/134
Lets see now.. the saftey monitoring system of a Nuclear plant was down for hours. Who within a thousand miles down wind of that plant or of the generation that could be effected by the fallout would agree that the virus in this circumstance had any community positive value.
There is no ethical or moral reason to release into the environment intentionally.
Finding exploits and letting companies know so that systems can be hardened is a good thing.
Lets say the same "ethic" was used against automobiles. Say finding rocks or bullets or gasoline whatever to cause the cars to stop of fail. So that auto manufactures had to harden their vehicles over and over until everyone was driving a tank.
Essentially this is what is happening in Iraq against our troops and essentially the virus and worm creators ARE terroists and their fruits effect the lives of innocent people.
Which kind of world do you want to live in. Always wearing a flack jacket and helmet and driving a tank, because some unethical idiots get off on seeding anonoumous distruction.
Lets just be clear about the process and the effect and the who lives in this world and whether any of us want to live looking over our shoulder all the time.
"Now that's what I call a good use of the technology!"
Lets look a little deeper into the consequences though. My mother was a librarian. Given a self service Library, no Librarians or fewer certainly. One might argue that low paid non-librarian staff would be fired but they are someone mother as well.
If the stores adopt the tags, fewer Shop workers. Where will they go. How will they make a living to get the money to buy from the shop.
We have an ecology here, any change like this changes the equilibrium point and there will be many hidden costs.
So be careful when you claim a good use of technology.
The tracking capabilities of the technology are quite high. Look at the recent story in slashdot on a Florida (I believe) city that just stopped using hidden face recognition cameras to try and identify criminals. It didnt work thank heavens or they would be up all over. If one Law enforcement group will try this, they will try and use and pass legistation to use this technology for similar purposes.
Be afraid, be very afraid.
If there were money involved, it would be done. Talk about efficient identity theft.
It much easier. According to DMCA (music of Village People in the background), if you have some security system build in to protect your copyrighted material, it is illegal for someone to circumvent it. Case in point.
/ 13 11232&mode=thread&tid=99
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/16
That is why the are building in "security features" in an attempt to set up the garage door opener defense. It seems quite clear from the wording of the new fixes.
It much easier. According to DMCA (music of Village People in the background), if you have some security system build in to protect your copyrighted material, it is illegal for someone to circumvent it. Case in point.
/ 13 11232&mode=thread&tid=99
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/16
That is why the are building in "security features" in an attempt to set up the garage door opener defense.
The stole it again. I refer to the work done in the Texas Chain Saw Massacre "The Next Generation".
i d= 37350
http://movies.go.com/filmography/Credits?movie_
Yep blatant flame bait. (and I specifically didnt mention the Canadians seeing that I work for a Canadian company, oh wait, they bought us, out sourced us, and are now exporting our servers and work up North, but who's counting, and who's going to feed my faminly, my mother is dead by the way you insensitive clod).
I think you miss the point, there is legitimate use for government, just look at the countries that dont have one Liberia for instance. It has taken a "big" presence to stop the turmoil. Here in this country, if we didnt have a big benevolent government we would still have slavery.
You use your mastercared but the dollars you trade have a commonly accepted value for trade. This is mediated by the government (through the banks). Government keeps the wheels turning, people reasonably civil and nice. The avenues of travel and communications open and a system of laws and enforcement to help keep things rolling along. For any country with resonable size populations and especially urban areas, this is necesarry. It has many forms but is necesarry. If you can show one counter example of a population of size that functions without a government doing these things (in the last 1000 years) then I'll consider you have a point. Sure we can do the necesarry things better, we always can. But not doing them at all is a scary proposition. We have seen governtments break down in Africa and Asia and it is a sad thing for the people there and ultimately for their neighbors and eventually, all of us.
Dont thow out the baby because the bath water has crap in it. Toilet train the baby.
Well its true there are other things tax dollars go for but that is small potatoes compared to the larger functions of government.
They can limit govenment to whats necesarry, oh I mean we can limit govenrment. But that takes a vote. Now the current rage it to limit the spending to only exploitist short term business and rich friendly subsidies, not to mention curbing freedoms and fredom of speech, oh and yes, lets steal a presidential election or two. You can see that you dont always get what you vote for.
Now for Government programs, especially fundemental research. That is a public spending that has paid for itself over and over and over. Because the fruits of that have been publicly owned and we all benefit. Lets take corporate reseach. Lets patent gene (for god's sake I have a few and I'll be damned if I pay royalties for them like SCO's license fee's for Linux). Or Drug reseach. Look at the greed there and the corporate greed tax for drugs here.
I always liked the article by I believe it was Alan Turing talking about his model of intellegence. He hypothoized building a TM to model intellegence, one that you programmed to tell the truth. You ask it if it can think. If it says "yes" do you believe it.
I am also reminded of the story of the Taoist and the Confusian standing on a bridge looking down into the water.
The Taoist says "How wonderful it is to be a fish swimming in a cool brook".
The Confusian looks at him and says "You can't know how it feels to be a fish swiming in a cool brook!".
The Taoist looks at him and says "How do you know?"
Well it happened to us with transistors, then IC's and even robotics, started here and in Europe. Its about time for turn about. But with all the economic clout with their ownership of most of our media and lots of Hawaii, they will get legislation passed to prevent us from copying there stuff.
Yes!
As long as you travel the roads, and get your mail, and don't have to fight off marauding gangs from the nearby hills, and have faith in the barter notes your trade for food. Don't you want people to be able to read that "No Tespassing" sign on your barbed wire fence. I think so.
Or buy and Island, raise your own food and protect your own borders from pirates. Maybe you can make and sell stamps to get money to pay for your tv set.
I Think the Security is to set up a DMCA case against 3d parties.. Reference that use of the act for garage door openers.
/ 13 11232&mode=thread&tid=99
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/16
Here the software which was copyrighted had a security feature that a competitor for a universal remote exploited. They closed them out of some big contracts by using copyrighted security feature circumvention and DCMA. Thats why they are doing this. To set up to use the DCMA against users of their system.
There are whispers of a time in the Great Before when people goofed off at work WITHOUT having web access! There were entire "coffee breaks" where not a single email was sent or a single http request made! I know! It boggles the mind. Turns out, lazy people have always been lazy!
Well it is a cultural thing, go to some cultures and nothing gets done, nothing much is expected. These societies still exists, you don't need to live that stressful, "you took 12 min for a break your fired" life. Thats not what life is about. Come on you business people your getting too greedy and the culture is telling you its ok. Its not.
Well its thats a true cost savings and one that many businesses practiced, by eliminating jobs of people close to retirement. They have several better solutions now. No retirement benefits and/ or outsourcing, you choose. No wait you have not choice.
Besides if by pension you mean social security then those people have paid for that privilege. It is just windfall profit for the government if they die sooner than they can collect on the funds they have kept in the governments safe hands against their retired years.
If it is truely a company pension then yes this is another form of legalized gambling where the insurance company benefits. But in either way it is not a societal cost. (well only if you take into account the governments stealing of SS funds for other things for many years and now we all have to pay for their misdeeds).
Yes very interesting fact. If Nevada were to rethink their tax stance then would they start getting into advertizements or relax restrictions on advertizements to increase revenues? Would they start issuing Pimp mobiles to state workers?
Regulating but not taxing seems to be a smart balanced approach to the matter.
After all there is no reason any particular thing is Taxed. Its just a way for the government go get funding.
Some of the problems with government taxation is it is based on economic activity or property values. But then if they fall off they are unwilling to take the fair portion they allotted themselves which then unmasks the "fairness" arguments they used to pass the taxes in the first place.
So little time and so many things to tax, what to do.
Several lines of logic show up here.
1. Gambling is a personal choice and should not be restricted.
2. Governments should get a percentage.
Prohibition showed us that some moral (religious) judgements go against the will of the people and that opens up an industry for gangsters. This has been shown to be true.
One of the benefits of legalizing alchohol was to make those gangsters find other businesses go to into. Drugs for example and gambling. Not sure that there was a long term benifit here.
The cost of course for readily available alcohol is alcoholism and all the assocaited trama and cost to the individual and society. Some of that spills over into lost lives and higher crime rates.
We have the same problem with drug addiction as it can ruin lives (especially when the addiction is so expensive because of being illegal) and the increase in crime, and with some drugs violence.
Gambling has the a similar associated cost of gambling addiction which has shown up in states that have legalized gambing with the associated cost to individuals, society and increase in crime.
We have as a population (here in the States) decided that the cost to the individual and society for tabacco smoking is such that we have decided to restrict its use. Mainly because the effects of second hand smoke and the increase in health problems raise everybodies insurance cost. Essentially we all pay for the habits of a few.
I think this is generally true but not generally perceived.
So there is a cost to allowing gambling. I have a problem with the government getting a vested interest in what could be viewed as also having a negitive societal cost. Seems like dirty money to me.
The chances of getting good enough weather all the way around is probably the largest problem. But then too to carry the fuel the size of the craft would probably be so large that there would be contention that it was just a pilotless plane and not a model.
Of course if you could get it solar powered and hitch a ride on the jet stream maybe.
But won't that require a $699 per machine license fee?