The founding fathers massively distrusted corporations due to their experience with the East India Company. The Boston Tea Party was as much a protest against the East India Company as it was the British Government (the East India Company was the proxy of the British Government in the colonies). They knew first hand the damage corporations could do and they believed the corporate charters should be handed out for limited periods of time with limited scope. We didn't have the immortal corporation in this country until the 19th century.
And there is no corporation today in the same relationship as the East India Company; even Halliburton, the closest analogy today, has nowhere near that level of power where they operate. But my overall point is this idea that we've moved from some egalitarian society to one where corporations control everything is just not true. Just like everything else in human history corporate dominance goes in cycles; it changes based on laws, the economy, demographics, and politics. If corporations had complete run of things half the laws wouldn't be on the books, including 95% of the Internal Revenue Code, ERISA, the Environmental Protection Act, and minimum wage laws. Slashdotters have to give up this simplistic, borderline-conspiracy-theory view of the world and start actually educating themselves. Corporations have too much power, I don't deny that. But they're not some unbeatable monolith crushing society.
Giving "rights" to entities like corporations, but without them having the same restrictions and motivations as an actual human being (like reason, conscience, morality and guilt) is the source of the biggest issues facing us since the later 20th century: the corporations are now in control of our government, our institutions and our resources. They have all this power but no real responsibility behind it.
How do you explain the fact then that corporations today have far less power than they did in the late 19th, early 20th century? There is no company in the US that wields the kind of power U.S. Steel or the railroads did.
Why do they need to be the equivalent of people for that?
Why not codify the law to say that corporations or people can do those things, rather than saying that corporations are people?
That's what they do now. Common slashdot belief to the contrary, actual living, breathing humans do have substantially more rights than corporations. The law simply allows them enough rights to function (and enough responsibilities to be held accountable for certain violations of the law).
Can anyone with a legal background explain what part of corporate daily business requires that corporations be legally considered equivalent to people?
Entering into contracts and owning, buying and selling services and property.
Actually I think it's kinda sad, because my country is heading directly towards a Zimbabwe paradox. "I have a million dollars; I'm rich!" "You mean you *were* rich. Today a million dollars only buys a small car." "Oh."
Doesn't sound too bad to me. No matter what the inflation rate is, my school loan debt stays the same...
I think these little public humiliations he sets himself up for are endlessly entertaining. It's fascinating to know that this guy was a lawyer at one time when he obviously knows very very little about what's legal and what isn't.
I've read some of his pleadings and filings, and I have got to say that as a (Florida licensed) lawyer I do not know how he ever had a legitimate career. He misuses legal terminology, he makes bizarre and insupportable legal arguments, and his writing skills are beyond weak.
I just meant technically, a species is generally not descended from a contemporaneous species; if you went back to a common ancestor, it wouldn't be a monkey--though it would look somewhat similar to what we consider monkeys, but would not technically be a monkey.
It's actually "anyone who takes things apart to learn how they work and then make them do something else."
Actually, it's anyone who does the above maliciously. Yes, I know you all want that to be the definition of "cracker." Unfortunately that's not how language works.
Hmmm, thanks for the tip! I'll check them out (though would rather buy somewhere other than Walmart...) I don't really print that much so I don't need anything super fast/efficient, just was looking for something cheap to maintain.
Anyone know any sturdy inkjets that have really cheap cartridges? I remember shopping for one once and the only cheap cartridges out were for printers they didn't make anymore.
A PPO through Aetna, purchased independently, with a $2,500 deductible is $90 a month for a 25 year old male. 45 year old male jumps it up to around $150 a month. If your making over $50,000 a year you should be able to easily afford this. Hell, my employer pays most of my insurance cost and I still pay around $50 a month.
That would be wonderful if it were true; unfortunately it varies immensely by state. Some states that will cost you over a thousand a month, if you can even find it.
If my network is so awesome that my neighbor wants to spend his own money and time to connect to it that does not give him any rights or entitlements over what still remains my network. Why is that Americans seem to be the only ones who can grasp basic ethical constructs like this? Oh, that's right, because we design everything and the rest of the world just whines about how they're entitled to our work.
Well said. Just quoting and posting at +2 so more people can see it before we both get modded down to -2.
You do understand that US as a nation haven't been going for long in historical scale? Most of what US has been based on now we're developed in europe before england shipped there (and robbed the land from native americans).
It was the Europeans who started robbing the land hundreds of years before the US came into existence. And please let us know what enlightened country you've come from.
So if you're gonna come up with the "US developed it and it shouldn't be used elsewhere", atleast think about where US tech has come from.
Most of it has come from the US, actually. But let's be honest here, nobody is trying to prevent internet technology from falling into other country's hands. You're not understanding the difference between the technology used to build an infrastructure, and the infrastructure itself.
As an EU citizen I'm happy and even surprised to see this happening - US actually caring about other people too
Considering the history of Europe in the 20th century, as an EU citizen you should be one of the last people to be "surprised" at the US helping others.
I don't think we're disagreeing here, I was just pointing out that the whole GPS tracking thing really doesn't have anything to do with self-incrimination, it's search and seizure.
Sometimes I think people such as yourself would stand in line to give up your freedoms if you could. Your post is wrong in several ways.
He's trolling...well, more subtle than trolling, he just likes to be so tongue in cheek that you're never sure if he's serious. You have to look at other posts of his to realize he's just trying to get a rise out of people.
A minute number of high school athletes make professional careers out of it and are successful, the rest end up working in construction or a similar career and spending the rest of their life thinking about how great high school was.
As a sedentary geek who never was a high school (or college) athlete, I have to say I knew plenty of athletes who were also extremely intelligent and went on to excel academically.
Slashdot Mirror
The founding fathers massively distrusted corporations due to their experience with the East India Company. The Boston Tea Party was as much a protest against the East India Company as it was the British Government (the East India Company was the proxy of the British Government in the colonies). They knew first hand the damage corporations could do and they believed the corporate charters should be handed out for limited periods of time with limited scope. We didn't have the immortal corporation in this country until the 19th century.
And there is no corporation today in the same relationship as the East India Company; even Halliburton, the closest analogy today, has nowhere near that level of power where they operate. But my overall point is this idea that we've moved from some egalitarian society to one where corporations control everything is just not true. Just like everything else in human history corporate dominance goes in cycles; it changes based on laws, the economy, demographics, and politics. If corporations had complete run of things half the laws wouldn't be on the books, including 95% of the Internal Revenue Code, ERISA, the Environmental Protection Act, and minimum wage laws. Slashdotters have to give up this simplistic, borderline-conspiracy-theory view of the world and start actually educating themselves. Corporations have too much power, I don't deny that. But they're not some unbeatable monolith crushing society.
Giving "rights" to entities like corporations, but without them having the same restrictions and motivations as an actual human being (like reason, conscience, morality and guilt) is the source of the biggest issues facing us since the later 20th century: the corporations are now in control of our government, our institutions and our resources. They have all this power but no real responsibility behind it.
How do you explain the fact then that corporations today have far less power than they did in the late 19th, early 20th century? There is no company in the US that wields the kind of power U.S. Steel or the railroads did.
Why do they need to be the equivalent of people for that? Why not codify the law to say that corporations or people can do those things, rather than saying that corporations are people?
That's what they do now. Common slashdot belief to the contrary, actual living, breathing humans do have substantially more rights than corporations. The law simply allows them enough rights to function (and enough responsibilities to be held accountable for certain violations of the law).
Can anyone with a legal background explain what part of corporate daily business requires that corporations be legally considered equivalent to people?
Entering into contracts and owning, buying and selling services and property.
The biology prize, as funny as it sounds, seems extremely useful and perfectly legitimate research.
Actually I think it's kinda sad, because my country is heading directly towards a Zimbabwe paradox. "I have a million dollars; I'm rich!" "You mean you *were* rich. Today a million dollars only buys a small car." "Oh."
Doesn't sound too bad to me. No matter what the inflation rate is, my school loan debt stays the same...
I think these little public humiliations he sets himself up for are endlessly entertaining. It's fascinating to know that this guy was a lawyer at one time when he obviously knows very very little about what's legal and what isn't.
I've read some of his pleadings and filings, and I have got to say that as a (Florida licensed) lawyer I do not know how he ever had a legitimate career. He misuses legal terminology, he makes bizarre and insupportable legal arguments, and his writing skills are beyond weak.
I just meant technically, a species is generally not descended from a contemporaneous species; if you went back to a common ancestor, it wouldn't be a monkey--though it would look somewhat similar to what we consider monkeys, but would not technically be a monkey.
but why is it so interesting to study where humans have come from and why exactly monkeys?
We're not descended from monkeys; we're just descended from a species that is also the ancestor of the other great apes.
It's actually "anyone who takes things apart to learn how they work and then make them do something else."
Actually, it's anyone who does the above maliciously. Yes, I know you all want that to be the definition of "cracker." Unfortunately that's not how language works.
I'd say the Morals of America have greatly changed since it's founding.
For the better.
Hmmm, thanks for the tip! I'll check them out (though would rather buy somewhere other than Walmart...) I don't really print that much so I don't need anything super fast/efficient, just was looking for something cheap to maintain.
Yet the Palm SDK License (as linked to in the article) states under section 4. Developers' Ownership and Ability to Distribute its Applications:
So sounds like Palm just modified Zawinksi's license, assuming he used the SDK.
Anyone know any sturdy inkjets that have really cheap cartridges? I remember shopping for one once and the only cheap cartridges out were for printers they didn't make anymore.
A PPO through Aetna, purchased independently, with a $2,500 deductible is $90 a month for a 25 year old male. 45 year old male jumps it up to around $150 a month. If your making over $50,000 a year you should be able to easily afford this. Hell, my employer pays most of my insurance cost and I still pay around $50 a month.
That would be wonderful if it were true; unfortunately it varies immensely by state. Some states that will cost you over a thousand a month, if you can even find it.
If my network is so awesome that my neighbor wants to spend his own money and time to connect to it that does not give him any rights or entitlements over what still remains my network. Why is that Americans seem to be the only ones who can grasp basic ethical constructs like this? Oh, that's right, because we design everything and the rest of the world just whines about how they're entitled to our work.
Well said. Just quoting and posting at +2 so more people can see it before we both get modded down to -2.
You do understand that US as a nation haven't been going for long in historical scale? Most of what US has been based on now we're developed in europe before england shipped there (and robbed the land from native americans).
It was the Europeans who started robbing the land hundreds of years before the US came into existence. And please let us know what enlightened country you've come from.
So if you're gonna come up with the "US developed it and it shouldn't be used elsewhere", atleast think about where US tech has come from.
Most of it has come from the US, actually. But let's be honest here, nobody is trying to prevent internet technology from falling into other country's hands. You're not understanding the difference between the technology used to build an infrastructure, and the infrastructure itself.
Well how often does the news report a judge vacating a judgment at all? Besides this story I can't remember one in the past few years.
As an EU citizen I'm happy and even surprised to see this happening - US actually caring about other people too
Considering the history of Europe in the 20th century, as an EU citizen you should be one of the last people to be "surprised" at the US helping others.
I don't think we're disagreeing here, I was just pointing out that the whole GPS tracking thing really doesn't have anything to do with self-incrimination, it's search and seizure.
You need engineers to do inspired work
Uhhh..like what? Apple's never come out with anything truly innovative, they're just very good at UIs and designing the physical shells of hardware.
Kramer is on a trust fund or the like, and lives oddly.
As a born-and-raised New Yorker, I can assure you that the city is full of people like him where you have no idea what their income source is.
Sometimes I think people such as yourself would stand in line to give up your freedoms if you could. Your post is wrong in several ways.
He's trolling...well, more subtle than trolling, he just likes to be so tongue in cheek that you're never sure if he's serious. You have to look at other posts of his to realize he's just trying to get a rise out of people.
But the difference with a wiretap a warrant is required
The point of the story is that now you need a warrant to put in a GPS unit.
Plus it is managed by the phone company who has a legal obligation to remove the tap if the warrant expires.
Not necessarily true, you can tap a phone with a device that transmits directly to the police via radio waves.
Plus, how do they know the person driving the vehicle is the person they are tracking?
When the phone is first answered you don't know who picked it up either; in both cases the police are monitoring a technical device.
My point is just that self-incrimination is not really implicated here.
A minute number of high school athletes make professional careers out of it and are successful, the rest end up working in construction or a similar career and spending the rest of their life thinking about how great high school was.
As a sedentary geek who never was a high school (or college) athlete, I have to say I knew plenty of athletes who were also extremely intelligent and went on to excel academically.