I think moral judgements should be done objectively, by people strategically thinking about how to minimize damage, not by people in the heat of the moment who refuse to shoot at a civilian but are perfectly fine with interrupting their food supply and killing hundreds of people that way.
Perhaps I was wrong to bring currency into this discussion, given that its value is based on the amount of it in circulation. My analogy would make a lot more sense if you were to steal something with a fixed value, like a computer, than something whose value is dependent on other people not having it.
Indeed. Unfortunately, even vlogs, tlogs and n-logs are dead too. What we need is cloud computing, that will save the online journalists (although it might c-log up the internet)
That's for windows. The linux version is in the "developer" stage (it's like alpha, but it has some marketing twist to suggest that you're part of some clique of "developers" allowed to see this early version).
2D sword-and-sorcery type RPGs are easy to make and fun. You get to apply the pythagorean theorem (distance calculations), trigonometry (calculating which angle the enemies face), AI (following, going around corners), and all the basic game making concepts.
You're operating the assumption that people are going to buy this for a reason other than the excitement of having REAL GOLD, that super expensive stuff that criminals steal and knights and princesses go after in movies, IN YOUR OWN POCKET.
For something to be a scam there has to be deception. There is no deception here - you know exactly what you're getting and exactly how much you're paying.
So if you overthrow an oppressive government and get a new, less evil government in power, the new government should execute you for helping them based on the previous government's laws?
Except that millions of people did not download from her. Most likely, two people downloaded off her and uploaded it themselves (she should not be responsible for these acts, which those people themselves are responsible for)
Now, let's do the math.
Assumptions:
- 1 download = 1 lost sale
- she uploaded 24 songs, each one worth 99 cents
- 2 people downloaded each song off her, and both uploaded it (as opposed to downloading copyrighted material and sharing open source stuff to avoid anti-leeching mechanisms)
- 10x damage multiplier, constitutional maximum
I would prefer combining a steeply progressive income tax (say, 6% up to 100k, 18% beyond it) with taxes based on what services you use (with the exception of those that everyone benefits from or those that are too hard to calculate, which the income tax pays for). Own a car? You pay for the roads, not the person who only rides a bicycle and therefore might as well not be on the road with the insignificant damage he is causing. Smoke, drink, drive without a seatbelt? Pay for your own health care then. Leave appliances on during your six-week vacation? No subsidized electricity so you pay the bill.
Not that I approve of the RIAA, but the amount of profit you make is irrelevant to the damages suffered by the victim. So stealing $1000 is not less bad if you burn all the money right after.
You seem to be acting on the premise that sex selection is somehow automatically evil, and evil enough to warrant such violations of a woman's freedom. It may be demographically undesirable but that doesn't give you the right to restrict a woman's right to choose what stays in her own womb.
Slashdot Mirror
So the important people will just retreat to their bunkers 150 meters below ground level.
I think moral judgements should be done objectively, by people strategically thinking about how to minimize damage, not by people in the heat of the moment who refuse to shoot at a civilian but are perfectly fine with interrupting their food supply and killing hundreds of people that way.
By "look", I meant "make it hard for people to do it privately and have the government watch carefully". Otherwise I agree with all those points.
Perhaps I was wrong to bring currency into this discussion, given that its value is based on the amount of it in circulation. My analogy would make a lot more sense if you were to steal something with a fixed value, like a computer, than something whose value is dependent on other people not having it.
Now, we just need to move the solar panels 149.59999 million kilometers closer and we'll all be fine.
Indeed. Unfortunately, even vlogs, tlogs and n-logs are dead too. What we need is cloud computing, that will save the online journalists (although it might c-log up the internet)
Almost nothing? So, it's like nothing, but there's not quite enough of it to be called nothing?
substituting "fox" with "faux" is a level of fail reserved for american news (olds?) services.
That's for windows. The linux version is in the "developer" stage (it's like alpha, but it has some marketing twist to suggest that you're part of some clique of "developers" allowed to see this early version).
2D sword-and-sorcery type RPGs are easy to make and fun. You get to apply the pythagorean theorem (distance calculations), trigonometry (calculating which angle the enemies face), AI (following, going around corners), and all the basic game making concepts.
You're operating the assumption that people are going to buy this for a reason other than the excitement of having REAL GOLD, that super expensive stuff that criminals steal and knights and princesses go after in movies, IN YOUR OWN POCKET.
For something to be a scam there has to be deception. There is no deception here - you know exactly what you're getting and exactly how much you're paying.
The only reason I can come up with to even look at economic transactions is taxation.
Right, I forgot you need to include cars to make it clear that an analogy is an analogy.
So if you overthrow an oppressive government and get a new, less evil government in power, the new government should execute you for helping them based on the previous government's laws?
Except that millions of people did not download from her. Most likely, two people downloaded off her and uploaded it themselves (she should not be responsible for these acts, which those people themselves are responsible for)
Now, let's do the math.
Assumptions:
- 1 download = 1 lost sale
- she uploaded 24 songs, each one worth 99 cents
- 2 people downloaded each song off her, and both uploaded it (as opposed to downloading copyrighted material and sharing open source stuff to avoid anti-leeching mechanisms)
- 10x damage multiplier, constitutional maximum
0.99*24*2*10 = $475.20
That's the cap.
I would prefer combining a steeply progressive income tax (say, 6% up to 100k, 18% beyond it) with taxes based on what services you use (with the exception of those that everyone benefits from or those that are too hard to calculate, which the income tax pays for). Own a car? You pay for the roads, not the person who only rides a bicycle and therefore might as well not be on the road with the insignificant damage he is causing. Smoke, drink, drive without a seatbelt? Pay for your own health care then. Leave appliances on during your six-week vacation? No subsidized electricity so you pay the bill.
No, the Internal Revenue Service is doing fine. It's the Infernal Revenue Service I'm wondering about.
A modern TV is just a big monitor. You can hook it up to a computer if you want.
Not that I approve of the RIAA, but the amount of profit you make is irrelevant to the damages suffered by the victim. So stealing $1000 is not less bad if you burn all the money right after.
http://www.thepiratebay.org
Dihydrogen monoxide is the correct answer.
What's RIA? Is it like the RIAA but without the A at the end? What's next then, MPA? BS?
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the United States started as a rebellion against the government?
You seem to be acting on the premise that sex selection is somehow automatically evil, and evil enough to warrant such violations of a woman's freedom. It may be demographically undesirable but that doesn't give you the right to restrict a woman's right to choose what stays in her own womb.