Those are both nice, especially when the need to communicate subtle points or specific knowledge is there. Neither can compete, however, with email's asynchronous communication style and the built-in conversation logging/"paper trail".
Well, that goes to show that "business" prefers multi-colored pierced people from one side of the server wars over dirty hippy sandal-wearers from the other side. (Imagine an emoticon here depicting a humorous intent.)
Thanks for the information, I hope the slight snarkiness isn't there just because someone who has to pay for medication dared ask why there seem to be some interesting excesses in a broken system.
If pharmacutical companies are spending so much that the entire company would cease to exist due to losing the ability to hold onto patents, then perhaps they should cut costs and find cheaper ways of doing the same thing. I also wonder how much of that high cost goes to patent lawyers and other people who wouldn't personally make money with the current patent system. Let's not forget the huge amount spent on marketing (TV, etc) and sales (50% of the people in the waiting room at my doctor's office are pretty sales ladies).
I'm not an advocate and not trying to get you to read that book specifically. That particular book is a collection of his writings, interviews, etc about the topic of Anarchism. The reason I point that out is that most of his political writings are not on that topic but are instead critiques of propaganda (as seen from his linguist eyes), imperialism, history, war, etc.
I'm not going to get into a discussion on the symantics of the word "private".
This is just a single quotej, yet it sums up what I have understood Chomsky to be presenting as a valid outlook on the control of the "means of production" (business, factories, etc.) that you first started to talk about:
My feeling is that any interaction among human beings that is more than personal - meaning that take institutional forms of one kind or another - in community, workplace, family, larger society, whatever it may be, should be under the direct control of the participants. So that would mean workers' councils in industry, popular democracy in communities, interaction between them, free associations in larger groups, up to organization of international society. You can spell out the details in many different ways, and I don't see really, a point in it.
- Noam Chomsky, Interview with Ziga Vodovnik, 2004, page 238 of "On Anarchism" published by AK Press 2005.
Alamo is a great chain. The alcohol insures there aren't any kids and they generally have great movies to watch, even if some of the Alamo's theatres cater to the LCD-type of movies. Good mix of mainstream, arthouse and cult/camp.
Short answer: the workers themselves. Long answer: On Anarchism
Re:Right and left are false dichotomies
on
Netroots Politics
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
My comment was a little snarky, but essentially boils down to me saying something like:
Giving power to private companies is not any better than leaving it in the hand of a bureaucratic institution.
Re:Right and left are false dichotomies
on
Netroots Politics
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Libertarianism at is logical end is just plain anarchy, and that never works for a civilized society.
There's more to anarchism than you might think. Whether or not it's possible or even desireable is definitely up for debate. Note that "anarcho-capitalism" is probably closer to the extreme end of "libertarianism" than "anarchism" itself.
I actually believe that could be true. I'm not one for paranoid conspiracy theories and such but it's probably not even a good idea to discuss that book.
Just to be clear, Chomsky is neither "liberal" nor pro-"big, tax-supported bureaucracies". He's an anarchist. That means a distinct lack of "big, tax-supported bureaucracies".
Right-wing hacks typically lump him in with the left-wing ones simply because he's uses a critic's eye when looking at the past and present actions of the U.S.
Re:Right and left are false dichotomies
on
Netroots Politics
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
limiting authoritarianism in America... by giving it to private companies.
Next step for this band and others to follow; produce and deliver an Album (as in collection of songs, not vinyl) that can be offered to those 250,000+ fans and growing without ever burning one CD.
There are many netlabels already doing this. Is that what you mean?
I don't know how many offices they have in the U.S. - but I drive by their Austin TX office every day on my way to work. Lately that building looks pretty deserted... No cars, the marquee with spiffy sayings hasn't been updated and just looking through the windows while driving by looks dead.
Please show me where Evolution says that "God doesn't exist, the universe spawned itself.". As has been stated repeatedly, the two are not mutually exclusive. The theor y of evolution is also not a theory of how life came into existence. It's a theory on how organisms...... well, ya know, evolve.
Slashdot Mirror
Those are both nice, especially when the need to communicate subtle points or specific knowledge is there. Neither can compete, however, with email's asynchronous communication style and the built-in conversation logging/"paper trail".
Well, that goes to show that "business" prefers multi-colored pierced people from one side of the server wars over dirty hippy sandal-wearers from the other side. (Imagine an emoticon here depicting a humorous intent.)
Thanks for the information, I hope the slight snarkiness isn't there just because someone who has to pay for medication dared ask why there seem to be some interesting excesses in a broken system.
If pharmacutical companies are spending so much that the entire company would cease to exist due to losing the ability to hold onto patents, then perhaps they should cut costs and find cheaper ways of doing the same thing. I also wonder how much of that high cost goes to patent lawyers and other people who wouldn't personally make money with the current patent system. Let's not forget the huge amount spent on marketing (TV, etc) and sales (50% of the people in the waiting room at my doctor's office are pretty sales ladies).
as some experts say
Can you cite the experts saying this? Just curious.
Power Electronics is a sub-genre of Noise.
You realize you're pretty much on the same side of the 'argument'?
I'm not an advocate and not trying to get you to read that book specifically. That particular book is a collection of his writings, interviews, etc about the topic of Anarchism. The reason I point that out is that most of his political writings are not on that topic but are instead critiques of propaganda (as seen from his linguist eyes), imperialism, history, war, etc.
I'm not going to get into a discussion on the symantics of the word "private".
This is just a single quotej, yet it sums up what I have understood Chomsky to be presenting as a valid outlook on the control of the "means of production" (business, factories, etc.) that you first started to talk about:
My feeling is that any interaction among human beings that is more than personal - meaning that take institutional forms of one kind or another - in community, workplace, family, larger society, whatever it may be, should be under the direct control of the participants. So that would mean workers' councils in industry, popular democracy in communities, interaction between them, free associations in larger groups, up to organization of international society. You can spell out the details in many different ways, and I don't see really, a point in it.
- Noam Chomsky, Interview with Ziga Vodovnik, 2004, page 238 of "On Anarchism" published by AK Press 2005.
Workers in contrast to an "owner". Do I really have to explain that?
Alamo is a great chain. The alcohol insures there aren't any kids and they generally have great movies to watch, even if some of the Alamo's theatres cater to the LCD-type of movies. Good mix of mainstream, arthouse and cult/camp.
Short answer: the workers themselves. Long answer: On Anarchism
My comment was a little snarky, but essentially boils down to me saying something like:
Giving power to private companies is not any better than leaving it in the hand of a bureaucratic institution.
Libertarianism at is logical end is just plain anarchy, and that never works for a civilized society.
There's more to anarchism than you might think. Whether or not it's possible or even desireable is definitely up for debate. Note that "anarcho-capitalism" is probably closer to the extreme end of "libertarianism" than "anarchism" itself.
I actually believe that could be true. I'm not one for paranoid conspiracy theories and such but it's probably not even a good idea to discuss that book.
Noam Chomsky
Just to be clear, Chomsky is neither "liberal" nor pro-"big, tax-supported bureaucracies". He's an anarchist. That means a distinct lack of "big, tax-supported bureaucracies".
Right-wing hacks typically lump him in with the left-wing ones simply because he's uses a critic's eye when looking at the past and present actions of the U.S.
limiting authoritarianism in America ... by giving it to private companies.
Reading that book is a red flag to pretty much all authorities these days.
Next step for this band and others to follow; produce and deliver an Album (as in collection of songs, not vinyl) that can be offered to those 250,000+ fans and growing without ever burning one CD.
There are many netlabels already doing this. Is that what you mean?
I know this doesn't answer all of your questions, but here are a few examples: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Category:XULR unner:Examples
I don't know how many offices they have in the U.S. - but I drive by their Austin TX office every day on my way to work. Lately that building looks pretty deserted... No cars, the marquee with spiffy sayings hasn't been updated and just looking through the windows while driving by looks dead.
Please show me where Evolution says that "God doesn't exist, the universe spawned itself.". As has been stated repeatedly, the two are not mutually exclusive. The theor y of evolution is also not a theory of how life came into existence. It's a theory on how organisms...... well, ya know, evolve.
This isn't about people's views. It's about teaching religion as a science and changing the very definition of science to be that of religion.
Uh.... shouldn't you be at school?
Touché, Qzukk, touché. You seem to be the only one here who remembers the first Elder Scrolls!