It's not clear what point you're trying to make, because you seem to be contradicting yourself. Poverty is always relative. If you want to compare levels of poverty you cannot take into account values like "32.7% of Indians live on less then $1.25 per day" but need to consider the goods people can actually buy for the given amount of money in their country.
That $1.25 is adjusted for purchasing power.
In other words, other people arent the idiots you think that they are just because what they are telling you doesnt jive with the shit that you yourself cannot back up with facts. Its your view of the world that is wrong.
I don't know if I can really pinpoint why I don't consider Steam to be the kick to the dick that almost all other DRM is.
Two reasons.
1) It continues to just work.
2) You get at least the game-play value out of it that you spent.
I've picked up a lot of sub-$5 games on steam. You know how much I will care if at some point I can no longer play them? About as much as a care that I let $5 worth of cheese spoil in my refrigerator this week. I wish it didn't happen, but it doesnt pain me.
You have got to be trolling at this point. Using homeless people to represent what life is like for most people in the US. Get a clue.
Not only that, he cited panhandling, an activity that when conducted in the western world nets more in a week than many in the 3rd and 2nd world earn in an entire year.
These people really have no clue what its like outside the western world.
India, population 1.2 billion.
32.7% of Indians live on less than $1.25 per day.
68.7% of Indians live on less than $2.00 per day.
Thats more than 2.6 times the entire population of the United States, in one single country, that lives on less than $2 per day.
Poor is relative. On a global scale, nobody at all in the United States is poor.
What has this world come to that we no longer think its expected to take responsibility for your actions?
Here is the deal. You drink and drive and nobody gets hurt and nothing gets damaged.. I'm not going to be "snitching" on you.. but if you slam into several vehicles and drive off, well guess what buddy... I'm "snitching" because you should accept responsibility for your god damned actions.
I feel the same way about Bradley Manning. Even if you think that its "right" to do the thing that you did, you still fucking accept the consequences. No crying about it, and no blaming the people that turned you in.
Nine times out of ten it's an electric razor. But every once in a while it's a dildo. Of course, it's company policy never to imply ownership in the event of a dildo. We have to use the indefinite article, "a dildo", never "your dildo."
while providing an incentive to change to cleaner, more efficient models or to drive less
It doesnt create an incentive for everyone to drive less, only those that get poor gas mileage... as if they didnt already have an incentive to drive less.
You set up a false dichotomy between "paying attention to minority views" and "ignoring the majority"
No I didn't. If you go back and read it again, the dichotomy that you just set up doesnt even include what I was talking about, which was that both majority and minority would get what it wants when you pay attention to the minority without a guiding principle that culls from both Majority and Minority demands.
So here you are accusing me of what you are ultimately guilty of, because in your world the only two cases are Majority wins and Minority wins, and you have assigned one of them to me..
How nice of you to assigning your views on others. You are exactly the problem.
You call my view of government insane, yet all I am doing is pointing out the lack of guiding principles that regulate the governments power over both majorities and minorities. You use words like "injustice", a nebulous term that conveniently allows you to make no principled stand at all. That such a term can and is used by multiple sides of the same issues should clue you in as to how wishy-washy it is.
I have no interest in visiting the WtP site just to get the chance to vote on something I am not personally invested in.
Thats one hell of a fallacy. You are personally vested in all actions of the government unless you have somehow managed to pay zero taxes.
The idea that its only $1 from my taxes is the biggest problem we have, because its thousands different micro-payments. Sure, its hard to be motivated to lobby against each $1-per-person program, but thats far removed from the idea of not being invested in it.
This makes the erroneous assumption that only those things are worthy of attention of government that a large percentage of the public agrees with.
Until you decide that its perfectly alright to ignore the majority, its hard to justify paying any attention to the minority. Otherwise everyone gets what they want, both majorities and minorities.
If only there were some sort of principle that could be used to veto both majorities and minorities..
This isnt an honest question. The Federal government that was intended is not the Federal government that we have, and Friedman spoke about this more than once.
A solution will _never_ be found until EVERYONE takes _responsibility_.
You are misguided in thinking that if everyone "takes responsibility" that the problem will be solved. The situation will remain asymmetric, where it is greatly advantageous to lobby for Federal favor but only marginally advantageous to lobby against that same Federal favor.
More to the point, if many people choose not to defend themselves then you will of course get many people not defending themselves.
In societies where people are commonly unprepared to defend themselves, then the least armed society will of course have fewer murders. Its common sense, but its not an argument against firearms. Its an argument against people commonly being unprepared to defend themselves.
The correct question to be asking is if the people that never prepared to defend themselves should still be afforded the maximum ability to defend themselves the instant things turn ugly, even if the solution is at the expense of other peoples ability to prepare to defend themselves long before things turn ugly.
I think that the answer to that question is no, that people should not have to sacrifice the advantage of foresight and preparation just because some people are unwilling to put in the effort themselves.
You do realize that your argument can be directed the other direction, right?
Instead of jumping to the idea of privately owned nukes due to the second amendment, why didnt you instead jump to the idea of the government not being allowed to own nukes due to the second amendment?
I'll tell you why you didnt jump to that conclusion. Its because in your universe the government is already all-powerful. You have already surrendered.
I've looked into reasons why I should feel bad about John Goatse, and have concluded that John himself cannot feel anything, physically or emotionally.
It is curious that you are comparing the increase in the price of gas with the increase in the price of things including gas, but labeling one inflation and the other simply a price increase.
if you think that insisting upon the distribution model the GPL (or any FOSS license) allows is a flaw, then you're pretty much anti-FOSS and should just admit it.
No, when they say "copy freely" they mean without restriction.
Most of the OSS licenses that I am aware of impose restrictions on copying on purpose, such as the various GPL's. You can't send me a copy of a GPL'd binary without following some rules.
Slashdot Mirror
Real nerds dont restrict themselves to computers, gadgetry, coding, and scifi.
..and how dare you leave out physics/chemistry.
It's not clear what point you're trying to make, because you seem to be contradicting yourself. Poverty is always relative. If you want to compare levels of poverty you cannot take into account values like "32.7% of Indians live on less then $1.25 per day" but need to consider the goods people can actually buy for the given amount of money in their country.
That $1.25 is adjusted for purchasing power.
In other words, other people arent the idiots you think that they are just because what they are telling you doesnt jive with the shit that you yourself cannot back up with facts. Its your view of the world that is wrong.
I don't know if I can really pinpoint why I don't consider Steam to be the kick to the dick that almost all other DRM is.
Two reasons.
1) It continues to just work.
2) You get at least the game-play value out of it that you spent.
I've picked up a lot of sub-$5 games on steam. You know how much I will care if at some point I can no longer play them? About as much as a care that I let $5 worth of cheese spoil in my refrigerator this week. I wish it didn't happen, but it doesnt pain me.
You have got to be trolling at this point. Using homeless people to represent what life is like for most people in the US. Get a clue.
Not only that, he cited panhandling, an activity that when conducted in the western world nets more in a week than many in the 3rd and 2nd world earn in an entire year.
These people really have no clue what its like outside the western world.
India, population 1.2 billion.
32.7% of Indians live on less than $1.25 per day.
68.7% of Indians live on less than $2.00 per day.
Thats more than 2.6 times the entire population of the United States, in one single country, that lives on less than $2 per day.
Poor is relative. On a global scale, nobody at all in the United States is poor.
Being poor in the US is also quite unpleasant...
Compared to what?
People like you have no damn clue what being poor means. Subsistence farming. Look it up.
What has this world come to that we no longer think its expected to take responsibility for your actions?
Here is the deal. You drink and drive and nobody gets hurt and nothing gets damaged.. I'm not going to be "snitching" on you.. but if you slam into several vehicles and drive off, well guess what buddy... I'm "snitching" because you should accept responsibility for your god damned actions.
I feel the same way about Bradley Manning. Even if you think that its "right" to do the thing that you did, you still fucking accept the consequences. No crying about it, and no blaming the people that turned you in.
What self-respecting hacker loses his old PGP key?
The kind that never wants old stuff decrypted.
Nine times out of ten it's an electric razor. But every once in a while it's a dildo. Of course, it's company policy never to imply ownership in the event of a dildo. We have to use the indefinite article, "a dildo", never "your dildo."
Because driving a high efficiency or electric vehicle should be encouraged, not penalized.
On top of paying less gasoline taxes, they also buy less gas... isnt that encouragement enough?
Oh I get it, there is no end to the depths of "encouragement" people with an agenda will swallow...
while providing an incentive to change to cleaner, more efficient models or to drive less
It doesnt create an incentive for everyone to drive less, only those that get poor gas mileage... as if they didnt already have an incentive to drive less.
In other words, does not compute.
You set up a false dichotomy between "paying attention to minority views" and "ignoring the majority"
No I didn't. If you go back and read it again, the dichotomy that you just set up doesnt even include what I was talking about, which was that both majority and minority would get what it wants when you pay attention to the minority without a guiding principle that culls from both Majority and Minority demands.
So here you are accusing me of what you are ultimately guilty of, because in your world the only two cases are Majority wins and Minority wins, and you have assigned one of them to me..
How nice of you to assigning your views on others. You are exactly the problem.
I agreed with you up until that statement.
You missed the obvious.. the President shouldn't be making economic decisions no matter how many people he consults with..
You call my view of government insane, yet all I am doing is pointing out the lack of guiding principles that regulate the governments power over both majorities and minorities. You use words like "injustice", a nebulous term that conveniently allows you to make no principled stand at all. That such a term can and is used by multiple sides of the same issues should clue you in as to how wishy-washy it is.
Newsflash: The entire purpose of government is to restrain people and limit what they can do.
So how did that transform into transferring money from large groups of people to small groups of people?
I have no interest in visiting the WtP site just to get the chance to vote on something I am not personally invested in.
Thats one hell of a fallacy. You are personally vested in all actions of the government unless you have somehow managed to pay zero taxes.
The idea that its only $1 from my taxes is the biggest problem we have, because its thousands different micro-payments. Sure, its hard to be motivated to lobby against each $1-per-person program, but thats far removed from the idea of not being invested in it.
Democracy disturbs you?
The tyranny of the majority disturbs me.
This makes the erroneous assumption that only those things are worthy of attention of government that a large percentage of the public agrees with.
Until you decide that its perfectly alright to ignore the majority, its hard to justify paying any attention to the minority. Otherwise everyone gets what they want, both majorities and minorities.
If only there were some sort of principle that could be used to veto both majorities and minorities..
Q. And who makes up the government?
This isnt an honest question. The Federal government that was intended is not the Federal government that we have, and Friedman spoke about this more than once.
A solution will _never_ be found until EVERYONE takes _responsibility_.
You are misguided in thinking that if everyone "takes responsibility" that the problem will be solved. The situation will remain asymmetric, where it is greatly advantageous to lobby for Federal favor but only marginally advantageous to lobby against that same Federal favor.
More to the point, if many people choose not to defend themselves then you will of course get many people not defending themselves.
In societies where people are commonly unprepared to defend themselves, then the least armed society will of course have fewer murders. Its common sense, but its not an argument against firearms. Its an argument against people commonly being unprepared to defend themselves.
The correct question to be asking is if the people that never prepared to defend themselves should still be afforded the maximum ability to defend themselves the instant things turn ugly, even if the solution is at the expense of other peoples ability to prepare to defend themselves long before things turn ugly.
I think that the answer to that question is no, that people should not have to sacrifice the advantage of foresight and preparation just because some people are unwilling to put in the effort themselves.
You do realize that your argument can be directed the other direction, right?
Instead of jumping to the idea of privately owned nukes due to the second amendment, why didnt you instead jump to the idea of the government not being allowed to own nukes due to the second amendment?
I'll tell you why you didnt jump to that conclusion. Its because in your universe the government is already all-powerful. You have already surrendered.
Why would the state require registration of guns?
Know thy enemy.
I've looked into reasons why I should feel bad about John Goatse, and have concluded that John himself cannot feel anything, physically or emotionally.
It is curious that you are comparing the increase in the price of gas with the increase in the price of things including gas, but labeling one inflation and the other simply a price increase.
if you think that insisting upon the distribution model the GPL (or any FOSS license) allows is a flaw, then you're pretty much anti-FOSS and should just admit it.
My distaste for the GPL is because its not FOSS.
GPL is not free. BSD is free.
No, when they say "copy freely" they mean without restriction.
Most of the OSS licenses that I am aware of impose restrictions on copying on purpose, such as the various GPL's. You can't send me a copy of a GPL'd binary without following some rules.