I'm just annoyed at NYCL's rude summary comments - "incompetent-apparently they don't teach [competence] at Harvard law school." I don't care if NYCL is the foremost authority on copyright cases, because I still consider it unprofessional. And juvenile. Just like I said in my first post.
We're not going to win anything if the anti-RIAA, pro-public domain lawyers fight amongst themselves like immature teenagers.
As a matter-of-fact, yes I am running for Congress in 3 years. I don't really expect to win since I didn't win my previous campaign for the state legislature, but I'm going to at least volunteer as a representative. I'm tired of sitting on the sidelines and watching politicians commit unconstitutional, illegal acts.
Congressman Ron Paul said he never sees these bills until just a few hours before the vote, and since he obviously doesn't have time to read a 1000 page or longer document that quickly, he votes "no" simply because he doesn't know what the bill says.
If only more Congresscritters had that level of integrity, but most just follow the lead of the senior Congressmen/women like sheep. If the senior says "vote yes" then they vote yes, even if they have no clue what the bill reads.
Actually yes, I've seen all kinds of dealers complaining on the local news, because the paperwork is a mess that keeps bouncing back. Plus they sold cars but they are not getting their $4000 credits because the money ran dry. They're understandably angry about *losing* money.
I don't consider that a success. I consider that mismanagement by Congress. They made EXACTLY the same mistake with the DTV coupons which ran out of money in December.... three months ahead of the official date... and forcing Americans onto a waiting list. At least in that case the allocated money lasted longer than 2 weeks, but it still shouldn't have happened.
What would you think of your boss if he told you, "Sorry I miscalculated and ran out of money. I'm not going to be able to pay your salary for the last six months of the year." You'd call him incompetant and the same is true of the Congresscritters.
>>>The government is, at least mildly,ACCOUNTABLE.
Yes but only once every two years. The businesses/banks are accountable all the time - every day. Everytime you spend a dollar (or not) you are exerting power over the business, so if it's maximum accountability that you want, then less government and more power to the consumer is what you need.
Back when I was just a student my boss at Sears reminded me of this. I had foolishly hung-up on a customer, and the store manager then chewed me out, saying that now only did we lose a $1000 refrigerator sale, we also lost a customer for life, which is worth about $50,000 longterm.
>>>I suppose all those executives at lehman brothers and AIG were so much better right?
I think you've forgotten that they were acting on behest of the Congressional mandate to "sell more houses to the poor," even when the buyers could put zero-money down, or afford the payments. Congress even threatened to sue banks that turned-down mortgage requests. So your example is just yet another case of Government Ineptitude - driving the housing market into a bubble, and then into the ground.
If Congress had kept hands-off, banks would have used credit checks and other traditional measures to deny mortgages to unworthy (poor) individuals, the housing bubble would not have happened, and we'd not be in a post-crash situation.
What you just described sounds like 1930s Corporatist Germany or Italy (small group of leaders; a supreme leader; integration between government and business).
No.
What I had in mind was the government which existed pre-Federal Reserve (pre-1910) which did not try to control the economy, but instead allowed people to move-about freely without restriction. *I* know how to run *my* store better than some Congressman whose only qualifications are speaking well and scoring lots of votes and has no business acument whatsoever.
Let the People run the businesses, and let Congress keep hands-off.
Credit is what brought-down the Roman Empire. After about 3 centuries of constant spending, the Roman and European populace was so deep in debt they had to sell their private homes, and thus was born the feudal system (average citizens in perpetual debt to a wealthy landlord). This was an extreme consumerism that had reached the point where people literally sold their bodies to survive.
It wasn't until the Black Death arrived circa 1350 that the feudal system finally collapsed, and the serfs had the power to demand wages (and a middle class was reborn).
The one advantage our society has is bankruptcy, such that people don't have to sell themselves, but can just wipe-out the debt via court order.
What those people need is the new 250mpg German car which holds just two people, and weighs about 200 pounds. It's perfect for 99% of our trips (to-and-from work or store). For the other 1% you can either drive separately (wife and kid in one; husband and kid in another), or hire a delivery truck to bring your new sofa home from the store.
Driving a Ford Living Room everywhere you go makes little sense.
If Americans truly want to keep those crap jobs here in America, then they should be willing to accept the same wages as a Mexican (a few dollars an hour). It's Americans unwillingness to give-up their $30/hour union jobs for an $8/hour union job that makes the factory closeup and move.
And of course the government could help-out by lowering taxes, so that it's possible to survive on that minimum wage factory job.
Building a new car burns-up the equivalent of 50,000 miles worth of gasoline (2000 gallons). And if that new car uses an exotic technology like hybridization, then it burns even more energy to build the battery. This is because you need to burn fuel to drive the bulldozers or chisels that mine the metal or rubber, the fuel to move the metal/rubber to the factory, and energy to melt the metal/rubber/plastic into useable products.
Driving an older car is better for the environment (saves 2000 or more gallons), and smashing an old car truly is the equivalent to smashing windows just to "make work". The only time upgrading makes sense is if the old car is belching smoke, but as long as it keeps passing State Emissions Tests then it's cleaner than buying new.
It's especially a waste to destroy all the parts.
Those nuts/bolts/radiators/et cetera should be recycled into repairing other cars, but instead Congress chose to destroy them. Tehy are following the old "throwaway" paradigm rather than the greener "reuse" philosophy. Bad, bad, bad policy.
We have very different definitions of good. When I shop I follow a policy of never buying anything unless it's at least 50% off, and often I get 60-70% off the price. That's why if I trade-in my ancient 80s pollutemobile, I would get a fifty mpg car. That's over 90% improvement, but I'm not eligible due to a stupid law.
The improvement I would make, in addition to the maximum of 17mpg tradein, I would mandate a minimum of 27mpg on the new vehicle - nearly 60% improvement. You could still buy an SUV at that level, if that's what you needed.
- So anyway at the end of the day, I'll still be driving my 1987 pollutemobile. - And other persons will be trading a dirty 17mpg SUV for another dirty 19mpg SUV. - The net effect on making air more breathable will be unmeasurable.
All I meant was that I'd rather spend the $250 on myself, rather than a stranger. $250 would buy my favorite songs over nearly the whole decade, such that I need not fear RIAA.
Reason Magazine calculated the total benefits an unemployed U.S. person receives (food stamps, free housing, et cetera) is equivalent to an $11 an hour job, with some states like California going as high as $20 an hour.
They argued since the average person is not stupid, they recognize that they are better-off remaining unemployed rather than take a "cut in pay" working for $7 at Walmart or McDonalds.
Yes. I would trade-in my old 1987 Plymouth to upgrade to a Volkswagen 50mpg Diesel (Jetta/Passat), but unfortunately my car doesn't meet the strict qualifications. Which I find funny. If I had an old 17mpg pickup I would be allowed to get a 19mpg SUV and get the free congressional money, but an upgrade from an old 80s pollutemobile to a new technology car that gets twice the MPG and is about one hundred times cleaner* is verboten.
Yet more government illogic and inefficiency.....
That's the same kind of illogic that allowed businesses to buy SUVs and then write them off their taxes (during the Bush years). I expected such things from the SUV-loving Republicans, but not from the Green Democrats. I expected the Democratic Congress to pass a bill that encouraged more high-MPG carss, not just an excuse to trade one gas-guzzling truck for another gas-guzzling truck.
Oh well.
* * Jetta Diesel == ULEV (ultralow emission vehicle) * 1987 Plymouth == so dirty it's banned from sale within the U.S. (except as an older used car)
And their mistake didn't just affect the government and a few carbuyers, but it's also affected the trillion-dollar car industry from Toyota to GM to Honda to Ford..... all of whom have developed and scheduled television advertising to run through November..... and suddenly all those spots are worthless.
That's called government inefficiency.
I just can't wait until that level of incompetence affects the health industry. Oh that's right - it already has via Medicare, Medicaid, and the govt-supplied health systems in Canada and Europe, where rationing based upon age ("sorry you're too old") is now common.
They estimated that $1 billion would be enough. They figured that would last for six months time.
It barely lasted 2 weeks.
This is why central economic planning doesn't work, and why shortages ran rampant throughout the Soviet Union and eastern communist countries. Simply put - Government politicians are no good at running an economy. They don't have the necessary skills.
>>>There's security cameras in every business, bus, train, plane, street, traffic cameras etc
Perhaps if you wankers would stop stealing clothing from my store, I wouldn't need cameras. But you do, therefore I do. I have a right to monitor what happens inside MY business. If you don't like it, don't enter into my small piece of real estate.
As for street cameras:
- being caught speeding by one of these "electronic cops" is no different than being caught speeding by a human cop. Don't want to be ticketed? Than don't speed (or else change the law to eliminate speed limits). You do not have to right to break the laws on a public thoroughfare, and if got caught, then be a man and pay the fine.
As for private homes:
I agree that the government has no business to enter my private domain. No quartering of troops in my home; no crossing the threshold without a warrant. That's the supreme law of the land.
The Romans made a mistake when they chose not to subdue the Scots and civilize them. Seriously Scots remind me of a bunch of American rednecks from the backwoods of West Virginia. They don't appreciate the benefit of being part of a larger union.
>>>welfare state created them that is total bullshit.
Is it?
I am currently being paid the equivalent of $14 an hour to sit on my butt doing nothing, and that unemployment benefit will last one-and-a-half years. Basically the State is "encouraging" me to be a slothful bum.
Fortunately I would rather be working which is why I'm still actively looking (plus it pays about three times more money), but it would be very very easy to just sit back, do nothing, and collect my $14/hour checks from my Democrat President and Congress.
I find it interesting that recordingindustryvspeople.com advises to donate money to ongoing trials, not Tennenbaum. That does make more sense if your goal is to defeat the MAFIAA. Although if I'm going to be spending money, then I'd rather just use it to buy the songs legally, which makes the whole issue moot.
Maybe the guy who is suing Amazon for damages will win a couple thusand dollars, and then he can donate that money to pay-off RIAA. That would be perfect symmetry - one jackass corporation paying-off another jackass corperation.
Sometimes I think we are mere ants walking in the midst of giants.
The slashdotters aren't going to like this answer, but here goes:
"Who cares?" As a hiring manager I want to see programs like OrCad and Mentor on students' resumes, not some no-name GenericCAD. Given two resumes that are virtually identical, the student with OrCad experience is the one who will be hired, because he can start work the very first hour on the job.
So do your students a favor and stick with OrCad, even if that means some will have to use the Windows PCs in the public labs. I owned a Commodore Amiga in college, which of course ran none of the PSpice or CAD engineering tools, but I still managed to get my work done in the computer labs. Your students can do the same.
Slashdot Mirror
Look.
I'm just annoyed at NYCL's rude summary comments - "incompetent-apparently they don't teach [competence] at Harvard law school." I don't care if NYCL is the foremost authority on copyright cases, because I still consider it unprofessional. And juvenile. Just like I said in my first post.
We're not going to win anything if the anti-RIAA, pro-public domain lawyers fight amongst themselves like immature teenagers.
As a matter-of-fact, yes I am running for Congress in 3 years. I don't really expect to win since I didn't win my previous campaign for the state legislature, but I'm going to at least volunteer as a representative. I'm tired of sitting on the sidelines and watching politicians commit unconstitutional, illegal acts.
Congressman Ron Paul said he never sees these bills until just a few hours before the vote, and since he obviously doesn't have time to read a 1000 page or longer document that quickly, he votes "no" simply because he doesn't know what the bill says.
If only more Congresscritters had that level of integrity, but most just follow the lead of the senior Congressmen/women like sheep. If the senior says "vote yes" then they vote yes, even if they have no clue what the bill reads.
Actually yes, I've seen all kinds of dealers complaining on the local news, because the paperwork is a mess that keeps bouncing back. Plus they sold cars but they are not getting their $4000 credits because the money ran dry. They're understandably angry about *losing* money.
I don't consider that a success. I consider that mismanagement by Congress. They made EXACTLY the same mistake with the DTV coupons which ran out of money in December.... three months ahead of the official date... and forcing Americans onto a waiting list. At least in that case the allocated money lasted longer than 2 weeks, but it still shouldn't have happened.
What would you think of your boss if he told you, "Sorry I miscalculated and ran out of money. I'm not going to be able to pay your salary for the last six months of the year." You'd call him incompetant and the same is true of the Congresscritters.
P.S.
>>>The government is, at least mildly,ACCOUNTABLE.
Yes but only once every two years. The businesses/banks are accountable all the time - every day. Everytime you spend a dollar (or not) you are exerting power over the business, so if it's maximum accountability that you want, then less government and more power to the consumer is what you need.
Back when I was just a student my boss at Sears reminded me of this. I had foolishly hung-up on a customer, and the store manager then chewed me out, saying that now only did we lose a $1000 refrigerator sale, we also lost a customer for life, which is worth about $50,000 longterm.
That's the power we consumers have over business.
>>>I suppose all those executives at lehman brothers and AIG were so much better right?
I think you've forgotten that they were acting on behest of the Congressional mandate to "sell more houses to the poor," even when the buyers could put zero-money down, or afford the payments. Congress even threatened to sue banks that turned-down mortgage requests. So your example is just yet another case of Government Ineptitude - driving the housing market into a bubble, and then into the ground.
If Congress had kept hands-off, banks would have used credit checks and other traditional measures to deny mortgages to unworthy (poor) individuals, the housing bubble would not have happened, and we'd not be in a post-crash situation.
What you just described sounds like 1930s Corporatist Germany or Italy (small group of leaders; a supreme leader; integration between government and business).
No.
What I had in mind was the government which existed pre-Federal Reserve (pre-1910) which did not try to control the economy, but instead allowed people to move-about freely without restriction. *I* know how to run *my* store better than some Congressman whose only qualifications are speaking well and scoring lots of votes and has no business acument whatsoever.
Let the People run the businesses, and let Congress keep hands-off.
Credit is what brought-down the Roman Empire. After about 3 centuries of constant spending, the Roman and European populace was so deep in debt they had to sell their private homes, and thus was born the feudal system (average citizens in perpetual debt to a wealthy landlord). This was an extreme consumerism that had reached the point where people literally sold their bodies to survive.
It wasn't until the Black Death arrived circa 1350 that the feudal system finally collapsed, and the serfs had the power to demand wages (and a middle class was reborn).
The one advantage our society has is bankruptcy, such that people don't have to sell themselves, but can just wipe-out the debt via court order.
What those people need is the new 250mpg German car which holds just two people, and weighs about 200 pounds. It's perfect for 99% of our trips (to-and-from work or store). For the other 1% you can either drive separately (wife and kid in one; husband and kid in another), or hire a delivery truck to bring your new sofa home from the store.
Driving a Ford Living Room everywhere you go makes little sense.
If Americans truly want to keep those crap jobs here in America, then they should be willing to accept the same wages as a Mexican (a few dollars an hour). It's Americans unwillingness to give-up their $30/hour union jobs for an $8/hour union job that makes the factory closeup and move.
And of course the government could help-out by lowering taxes, so that it's possible to survive on that minimum wage factory job.
Building a new car burns-up the equivalent of 50,000 miles worth of gasoline (2000 gallons). And if that new car uses an exotic technology like hybridization, then it burns even more energy to build the battery. This is because you need to burn fuel to drive the bulldozers or chisels that mine the metal or rubber, the fuel to move the metal/rubber to the factory, and energy to melt the metal/rubber/plastic into useable products.
Driving an older car is better for the environment (saves 2000 or more gallons), and smashing an old car truly is the equivalent to smashing windows just to "make work". The only time upgrading makes sense is if the old car is belching smoke, but as long as it keeps passing State Emissions Tests then it's cleaner than buying new.
It's especially a waste to destroy all the parts.
Those nuts/bolts/radiators/et cetera should be recycled into repairing other cars, but instead Congress chose to destroy them. Tehy are following the old "throwaway" paradigm rather than the greener "reuse" philosophy. Bad, bad, bad policy.
>>>12%
We have very different definitions of good. When I shop I follow a policy of never buying anything unless it's at least 50% off, and often I get 60-70% off the price. That's why if I trade-in my ancient 80s pollutemobile, I would get a fifty mpg car. That's over 90% improvement, but I'm not eligible due to a stupid law.
The improvement I would make, in addition to the maximum of 17mpg tradein, I would mandate a minimum of 27mpg on the new vehicle - nearly 60% improvement. You could still buy an SUV at that level, if that's what you needed.
- So anyway at the end of the day, I'll still be driving my 1987 pollutemobile.
- And other persons will be trading a dirty 17mpg SUV for another dirty 19mpg SUV.
- The net effect on making air more breathable will be unmeasurable.
I saw some guy donated $250 towards the cause.
All I meant was that I'd rather spend the $250 on myself, rather than a stranger. $250 would buy my favorite songs over nearly the whole decade, such that I need not fear RIAA.
Reason Magazine calculated the total benefits an unemployed U.S. person receives (food stamps, free housing, et cetera) is equivalent to an $11 an hour job, with some states like California going as high as $20 an hour.
They argued since the average person is not stupid, they recognize that they are better-off remaining unemployed rather than take a "cut in pay" working for $7 at Walmart or McDonalds.
Yes. I would trade-in my old 1987 Plymouth to upgrade to a Volkswagen 50mpg Diesel (Jetta/Passat), but unfortunately my car doesn't meet the strict qualifications. Which I find funny. If I had an old 17mpg pickup I would be allowed to get a 19mpg SUV and get the free congressional money, but an upgrade from an old 80s pollutemobile to a new technology car that gets twice the MPG and is about one hundred times cleaner* is verboten.
Yet more government illogic and inefficiency.....
That's the same kind of illogic that allowed businesses to buy SUVs and then write them off their taxes (during the Bush years). I expected such things from the SUV-loving Republicans, but not from the Green Democrats. I expected the Democratic Congress to pass a bill that encouraged more high-MPG carss, not just an excuse to trade one gas-guzzling truck for another gas-guzzling truck.
Oh well.
*
* Jetta Diesel == ULEV (ultralow emission vehicle)
* 1987 Plymouth == so dirty it's banned from sale within the U.S. (except as an older used car)
P.S.
And their mistake didn't just affect the government and a few carbuyers, but it's also affected the trillion-dollar car industry from Toyota to GM to Honda to Ford..... all of whom have developed and scheduled television advertising to run through November..... and suddenly all those spots are worthless.
That's called government inefficiency.
I just can't wait until that level of incompetence affects the health industry. Oh that's right - it already has via Medicare, Medicaid, and the govt-supplied health systems in Canada and Europe, where rationing based upon age ("sorry you're too old") is now common.
They estimated that $1 billion would be enough. They figured that would last for six months time.
It barely lasted 2 weeks.
This is why central economic planning doesn't work, and why shortages ran rampant throughout the Soviet Union and eastern communist countries. Simply put - Government politicians are no good at running an economy. They don't have the necessary skills.
>>>There's security cameras in every business, bus, train, plane, street, traffic cameras etc
Perhaps if you wankers would stop stealing clothing from my store, I wouldn't need cameras. But you do, therefore I do. I have a right to monitor what happens inside MY business. If you don't like it, don't enter into my small piece of real estate.
As for street cameras:
- being caught speeding by one of these "electronic cops" is no different than being caught speeding by a human cop. Don't want to be ticketed? Than don't speed (or else change the law to eliminate speed limits). You do not have to right to break the laws on a public thoroughfare, and if got caught, then be a man and pay the fine.
As for private homes:
I agree that the government has no business to enter my private domain. No quartering of troops in my home; no crossing the threshold without a warrant. That's the supreme law of the land.
The Romans made a mistake when they chose not to subdue the Scots and civilize them. Seriously Scots remind me of a bunch of American rednecks from the backwoods of West Virginia. They don't appreciate the benefit of being part of a larger union.
>>>welfare state created them that is total bullshit.
Is it?
I am currently being paid the equivalent of $14 an hour to sit on my butt doing nothing, and that unemployment benefit will last one-and-a-half years. Basically the State is "encouraging" me to be a slothful bum.
Fortunately I would rather be working which is why I'm still actively looking (plus it pays about three times more money), but it would be very very easy to just sit back, do nothing, and collect my $14/hour checks from my Democrat President and Congress.
The welfare states *does* create the lifestyle.
>>>TV watches you!
So the British author who wrote 1984 was clairvoyant. I wonder if he's related to Nostradamus?
P.S.
I find it interesting that recordingindustryvspeople.com advises to donate money to ongoing trials, not Tennenbaum. That does make more sense if your goal is to defeat the MAFIAA. Although if I'm going to be spending money, then I'd rather just use it to buy the songs legally, which makes the whole issue moot.
Maybe the guy who is suing Amazon for damages will win a couple thusand dollars, and then he can donate that money to pay-off RIAA. That would be perfect symmetry - one jackass corporation paying-off another jackass corperation.
Sometimes I think we are mere ants walking in the midst of giants.
>>> It was my PC that said you were a twat, not me
You remind me of my grandmother who thought her toaster was talking to her. We sent her to a psychiatrist, and you should do the same.
The slashdotters aren't going to like this answer, but here goes:
"Who cares?" As a hiring manager I want to see programs like OrCad and Mentor on students' resumes, not some no-name GenericCAD. Given two resumes that are virtually identical, the student with OrCad experience is the one who will be hired, because he can start work the very first hour on the job.
So do your students a favor and stick with OrCad, even if that means some will have to use the Windows PCs in the public labs. I owned a Commodore Amiga in college, which of course ran none of the PSpice or CAD engineering tools, but I still managed to get my work done in the computer labs. Your students can do the same.