Why isn't the content industry responsible for this? If I go to Walmart, then Walmart pays people to watch the cameras so I don't walk out with a big screen tv under my shirt. It is considered part of the cost of doing business. How does the entertainment industry get away with pushing the costs of discovery on the government and other companies? (I do know the answer is paying congress.)
I have a different experience with liberals and conservatives. Perhaps it is due to my profoundly conservative climate that has afforded me a better selection of conservative friends and a poorer selection of liberal friends, but I've seen no difference in my liberal and conservative friends in willingness to accept data contradictory to their position.
I'm fed up with the attitude in the US that there must be two positions in general on any issue. I've noticed plenty of emotional arguments from my Liberal friends. I'm hard pressed to think of any non-emotional arguments on any topic that I disagree with. The attached article does not really explain if the 'smart idiot' is in all data presented or only that which conflicts with their worldview. As a slightly conservative leaning moderate, I've found that as I gain education levels I become more critical of all information presented to me. I wouldn't label that as a negative. But maybe I'm being a smart idiot for questioning the article because I disagree with it on some level.
I need a system where I have access to shelter, food, water, and health care. So does everyone else. We (socially) need books, movies, music, dance, and other cultural and technical avenues of information distribution to improve humanity and promote the intelligence and compassion necessary that the next generation won't drop the idea that everyone needs a system to access their basic needs.
My state's Castle law states specifically that it can't be used if the invader is a LEO acting in pursuit of his duties. No one has ever been able to legally explain how this would play out in court in the case of a no-knock warrant. I presume that even with a no knock warrant there is a formal announcement, but if my door bursts in I may not have time to wait for verification. I keep thinking of the guy who got SWATed and met the team with a kitchen knife when he heard people sneaking around outside his house.
Now if I were to pave a road through your backyard and let vehicles travel by your bedroom window at all times of the day and night, what do you suppose would happen to me? Maybe I'm missing your sarcasm, but government is a group of people to which we give additional protections and authority for the purpose of executing actions that are in the benefit of society in general. We should fight corruption and try to maintain a fair definition of benefit to society, but to say they are to be held to the exact same standards as private citizens is to open yourself to exploitation from any number of persons or groups that wield an individual does.
"Because he puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes ya crave it fortnightly, smartass!" Joking aside I think the food industry in the US has done a good deal of work of hacking our food in concert with hacking regulation and planting ideas through advertisements to control us. Granted it isn't further than buy our products, but it still isn't as far as it first seems.
Well I intended that to be in voice but I didn't word it well. I've seen plenty of people who have enough distrust in the medical community to fall into to think that this might not be so hypothetical. If someone falls into that category, the technical details of GPS don't matter. I do understand how GPS works.
So here is the thing. I want you the well known actor/actress/producer etc. to bump my ratings. Are you going to come work for me for some tiny trial salary to see if the show takes off? Or you are a writer, what kind of story will you write if you don't have a season commitment? Well that means for a series, the best thing is probably a season purchase by the consumers. Now you are running the studio, you need to finance the production of a whole season of the series before the viewers start paying. How many regular series do you need running to pay for all the lackies to run down financing and manage your business? Well you need a bunch. For argument's sake, lets call it a "channel". Now you are starting to grow, you have a bunch of these "channels" under your belt. Most everyone wants to pay for your sports "channels" but maybe only a couple hundred thousand want your science "channels." Well you can drop the science channels but you lose all those customers who aren't really interested in your sports "channels." So the best business decision is to sell a bundle of channels to the customer through their provider. And then finally you have the provider who won't have customers if they charge for every bundle, so they pick and choose their bundles to be affordable. Let's call this a "subscription." I'd probably pay $2 an episode but you are pushing a lot of risk on the networks that they won't take (and may not be able to afford to take at $2 an episode.) Is the risk half the season price? The season price? A season and a half because of the adminstration costs?
Yeah. Very cool, specifically for someone like me who regularly works with 3D visuals. However with all this hype about it being a Kinect competitor, I'd say there is a substantial difference between this and a kinect. That is much the same way that my bedroom TV is cheaper and has resolution as fine as my living room tv.
So you can make a product that can be used to fill up to 15% of your transportation needs (assuming you have a normal gasoline engine)? The gas companies are already maxing out safe alcohol content to keep their costs at a minimum. How much do you save brewing your own alcohol and mixing it with pure gasoline?
Well the biggest complaint I've heard about taxes and Churches is they aren't subject to property tax. As such a number of religious organizations have horded very desirable land. Since they aren't taxed then even a congregation with no monetary intake would never have to turn that land back over to the public. Unfortunate, but are you really going to get a constitutional amendment to allow the government to tax religious non-profits?
In McCulloch vs Maryland (1819), the state of Maryland tried to tax a federal bank with which they didn't think the federal government had the authority to establish. A precedent that came out of the ruling was that the ability to tax is the ability to destroy an organization. Under such a precedent, any effort to tax religion would most certainly violate the First Amendment.
I'm not saying that they should never expire, but the time limit is really hard to pin down legalistically. I'd say that the limit should be no longer than the death of the originators and probably much shorter. Should someone be able to scan and post Harry Potter on Project Guttenburg the week after publication? Two weeks? Two years? Two decades? I don't know. Will making it two years mean that Rowling gives up writing and never publishes another book?
You also have the factors of above average income workers are less likely to need multiple jobs to bring in their income (meaning more free time to cook), less likely to be a single parent (again time to cook), and most importantly they have the luxury of food price competition within transportation distance (meaning lower price foods).
I'm with Intrepid here. There is absolutely nothing wrong with an artist retiring on even a single work if a large enough percentage of society has found it influential. There shouldn't be an insentive for you to get rich by taking most of her ideas and doing something else with them without her permission for some reasonable time. Reasonable time is a very squishy thing, being a partial function of popularity, a partial function of the time involved to make more deliverable thoughts.
"its not that hard to hold a toddler a fraction of your weight and ability in your lap" As a martial artist with over 1000 hours mat time in grappling arts and who is at three to four times the weight of my oldest, I'd like to say YMMV. Our youngest is quite easy to hold still even if he doesn't like it. To put our oldest still in a place he doesn't want to be is one of the hardest grappling feats I have ever undertaken.
I'm not going to belabor the points stated below. Rather I'm curious about other slashdotters opinions on whether it is bad or not. I'm of the opinion that human labor conserved to produce the same product is beneficial to humanity has a whole, but there are many under the impression that the loss of jobs to automation is just as debilitating to the American worker as outsourcing.
Slashdot Mirror
Why isn't the content industry responsible for this? If I go to Walmart, then Walmart pays people to watch the cameras so I don't walk out with a big screen tv under my shirt. It is considered part of the cost of doing business. How does the entertainment industry get away with pushing the costs of discovery on the government and other companies? (I do know the answer is paying congress.)
I have a different experience with liberals and conservatives. Perhaps it is due to my profoundly conservative climate that has afforded me a better selection of conservative friends and a poorer selection of liberal friends, but I've seen no difference in my liberal and conservative friends in willingness to accept data contradictory to their position.
I'm fed up with the attitude in the US that there must be two positions in general on any issue. I've noticed plenty of emotional arguments from my Liberal friends. I'm hard pressed to think of any non-emotional arguments on any topic that I disagree with. The attached article does not really explain if the 'smart idiot' is in all data presented or only that which conflicts with their worldview. As a slightly conservative leaning moderate, I've found that as I gain education levels I become more critical of all information presented to me. I wouldn't label that as a negative. But maybe I'm being a smart idiot for questioning the article because I disagree with it on some level.
I need a system where I have access to shelter, food, water, and health care. So does everyone else. We (socially) need books, movies, music, dance, and other cultural and technical avenues of information distribution to improve humanity and promote the intelligence and compassion necessary that the next generation won't drop the idea that everyone needs a system to access their basic needs.
After all this time of telling them to innovate or die, maybe they finally listened to slashdot...
My state's Castle law states specifically that it can't be used if the invader is a LEO acting in pursuit of his duties. No one has ever been able to legally explain how this would play out in court in the case of a no-knock warrant. I presume that even with a no knock warrant there is a formal announcement, but if my door bursts in I may not have time to wait for verification. I keep thinking of the guy who got SWATed and met the team with a kitchen knife when he heard people sneaking around outside his house.
Now if I were to pave a road through your backyard and let vehicles travel by your bedroom window at all times of the day and night, what do you suppose would happen to me? Maybe I'm missing your sarcasm, but government is a group of people to which we give additional protections and authority for the purpose of executing actions that are in the benefit of society in general. We should fight corruption and try to maintain a fair definition of benefit to society, but to say they are to be held to the exact same standards as private citizens is to open yourself to exploitation from any number of persons or groups that wield an individual does.
"Because he puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes ya crave it fortnightly, smartass!" Joking aside I think the food industry in the US has done a good deal of work of hacking our food in concert with hacking regulation and planting ideas through advertisements to control us. Granted it isn't further than buy our products, but it still isn't as far as it first seems.
Well I intended that to be in voice but I didn't word it well. I've seen plenty of people who have enough distrust in the medical community to fall into to think that this might not be so hypothetical. If someone falls into that category, the technical details of GPS don't matter. I do understand how GPS works.
So here is the thing. I want you the well known actor/actress/producer etc. to bump my ratings. Are you going to come work for me for some tiny trial salary to see if the show takes off? Or you are a writer, what kind of story will you write if you don't have a season commitment? Well that means for a series, the best thing is probably a season purchase by the consumers. Now you are running the studio, you need to finance the production of a whole season of the series before the viewers start paying. How many regular series do you need running to pay for all the lackies to run down financing and manage your business? Well you need a bunch. For argument's sake, lets call it a "channel". Now you are starting to grow, you have a bunch of these "channels" under your belt. Most everyone wants to pay for your sports "channels" but maybe only a couple hundred thousand want your science "channels." Well you can drop the science channels but you lose all those customers who aren't really interested in your sports "channels." So the best business decision is to sell a bundle of channels to the customer through their provider. And then finally you have the provider who won't have customers if they charge for every bundle, so they pick and choose their bundles to be affordable. Let's call this a "subscription." I'd probably pay $2 an episode but you are pushing a lot of risk on the networks that they won't take (and may not be able to afford to take at $2 an episode.) Is the risk half the season price? The season price? A season and a half because of the adminstration costs?
Please disregard. When I read medical devices, I was thinking things like my neice's insulin pump. Didn't read the summary carefully enough.
Yeah, I see that going over well... How does it keep time? Oh GPS. Don't worry, we aren't tracking you. No thanks, I'm going to get a second opinion.
But how can we know unless we pirate copies or read the spoilers???
Yeah. Very cool, specifically for someone like me who regularly works with 3D visuals. However with all this hype about it being a Kinect competitor, I'd say there is a substantial difference between this and a kinect. That is much the same way that my bedroom TV is cheaper and has resolution as fine as my living room tv.
How big an area does Kinect cover again? Nice on the precision, but the effective area is about my seated computing space.
So you can make a product that can be used to fill up to 15% of your transportation needs (assuming you have a normal gasoline engine)? The gas companies are already maxing out safe alcohol content to keep their costs at a minimum. How much do you save brewing your own alcohol and mixing it with pure gasoline?
Can you make gasoline in your garage from sources that fall on your property regularly?
Well the biggest complaint I've heard about taxes and Churches is they aren't subject to property tax. As such a number of religious organizations have horded very desirable land. Since they aren't taxed then even a congregation with no monetary intake would never have to turn that land back over to the public. Unfortunate, but are you really going to get a constitutional amendment to allow the government to tax religious non-profits?
In McCulloch vs Maryland (1819), the state of Maryland tried to tax a federal bank with which they didn't think the federal government had the authority to establish. A precedent that came out of the ruling was that the ability to tax is the ability to destroy an organization. Under such a precedent, any effort to tax religion would most certainly violate the First Amendment.
Because they have children? Is there any other reason to go to McDs?
I'm not saying that they should never expire, but the time limit is really hard to pin down legalistically. I'd say that the limit should be no longer than the death of the originators and probably much shorter. Should someone be able to scan and post Harry Potter on Project Guttenburg the week after publication? Two weeks? Two years? Two decades? I don't know. Will making it two years mean that Rowling gives up writing and never publishes another book?
You also have the factors of above average income workers are less likely to need multiple jobs to bring in their income (meaning more free time to cook), less likely to be a single parent (again time to cook), and most importantly they have the luxury of food price competition within transportation distance (meaning lower price foods).
I'm with Intrepid here. There is absolutely nothing wrong with an artist retiring on even a single work if a large enough percentage of society has found it influential. There shouldn't be an insentive for you to get rich by taking most of her ideas and doing something else with them without her permission for some reasonable time. Reasonable time is a very squishy thing, being a partial function of popularity, a partial function of the time involved to make more deliverable thoughts.
"its not that hard to hold a toddler a fraction of your weight and ability in your lap" As a martial artist with over 1000 hours mat time in grappling arts and who is at three to four times the weight of my oldest, I'd like to say YMMV. Our youngest is quite easy to hold still even if he doesn't like it. To put our oldest still in a place he doesn't want to be is one of the hardest grappling feats I have ever undertaken.
I'm not going to belabor the points stated below. Rather I'm curious about other slashdotters opinions on whether it is bad or not. I'm of the opinion that human labor conserved to produce the same product is beneficial to humanity has a whole, but there are many under the impression that the loss of jobs to automation is just as debilitating to the American worker as outsourcing.