Afraid how our words and actions may be perceived years later and taken out of context, the lack of forgetting may prompt us to speak less freely and openly."
I wonder if this guy has ever read a flame war. Who thinks there's a danger of people not speaking freely enough?
I'm tempted to buy this latest DVD incarnation with the 1977 version, but I've read that the quality is poor. Plus I'd hate to buy this installment if a restored version appears shortly. Should I retire the laserdiscs or not?
What is it about being a commodity implies money cannot be a medium to symbolize value?
As you've discussed, printing more more doesn't create value. Creating more coffee does create value. So in some way these items are in different categories of items. One of them is *stuff and the other is stuff.
I'm arguing, but I'm doing so in an effort to understand your point.
Actually, currency is a commodity in exactly the same way as coffee, bread, oil, gold, pork bellies.
Actual stuff is different than money. If I am marooned on an island, I can eat bread. The money is useless.
What does "commodity" mean to you here? I understand that there's a market for money and there's a market for money, both of which are affected by supply and demand.
Why can't there be a market for a "medium to symbolize value"? What property of a commodity makes this wrong?
you can't run XP and media player with anything but cutting edge horsepower. If you'd buy a $1500 computer and a $400 set top box, you'd probably jump at the idea of an $1900 combination box, right?
Anti - price fixing laws are actually becoming quite a real problem or manufacturers and retailers, because they have to juggle the retail channel (which really needs 30%) with the online channel, which can be profitable on only about 6% margin. Preventing online from undercutting retail means giving them less margin, which is fair, but even then they can undercut until their margin is absolutely microscopic and still make money, whereas the retailer can not.
If you're happy with a world where brick and mortar retailers just can't exist, then by all means keep the current system and they will die, and not because of free market forces, but because manufacturers can't control their street prices.
If people aren't getting a service they value, why [i]should[/i] there be a B&M?
I'd assumed that farmers actually owned their land and didn't have to pay for it every year. Or is there some massive tax on land? Why tax the land if you're then going to subsidise it?
There's an intersection of the sets of land owners and farmers, but they aren't equivalent. Yes, sometimes land stays in the family for generations. But farms have been growing in size for decades due to larger machinery and better herbicides. So a farm with the proper economy of scale (in the midwest) generally includes either rented land or a large mortgage.
Land is taxed heavily by the counties and then subsidized (indirectly) by the Feds.
I'm not really sure what the price of land has to do with it. If there was an open, unsubsidised food market, American farms simply wouldn't make enough money to keep going. Food is too cheap. You either need to raise the price of food (with tariffs, for example) or subsidise the farms.
Land is the biggest cost in the production of food in the US. I can't imagine why you don't think it's a factor.
Because food is cheaper to import than produce locally so all the farms would go out of business. And you don't want to depend on other, potentially unstable, countries for food.
I think that's very unlikely. There's a price of land at which American farmers can compete. Farm subsidies keep the price of land high, because owning land is way to collect subsidies.
Farmers are often (but not always) land owners, so a sudden drop in subsidies would be very painful. But don't get the idea that without subsidies that all the American farmland would be used for more Starbucks.
Um, I can use my computer while it updates software. Maybe not during the initial install, but I did that in September (when I bought this box) of last year. I don't get your point. Are you trying to be smart?
Put Gentoo CD in drive, install, no need for license key bullshit. When I get bored I play the piano, or if music isn't my fancy I turn on the xbox and play something.
Right, you have to do something while it compiles.
But even if this corn does NOT produce anything un-natural, you still have the issue of farmers being able to indiscriminately spray pesticides on their fields without affecting the corn. Undoubtedly this means that more RoundUp is getting on the corn, in the ground, etc., than would otherwise be possible, so I wouldn't doubt that some of the pesticide is moving up through the food chain to us. Either way, you have non-natural chemicals entering the human food supply, which could easily have adverse health effects.
Farmers have been using herbicides on corn crops for decades. So it's not as if GM corn caused herbicide use.
One might argue that RoundUp is more dangerous, and I can't really speak to that point. I can tell you that a salesman once drank concentrated atrazine to demonstrate its safety to my father, and he didn't die right away.
Imagine a person buys apples and some books instead of a TV decoder. He submits the receipts to the government and they reply, no you bought the wrong stuff. We deem your use of $40 to be less valuable to society than watching TV.
Fuzzy bunnies. My brain got ahead of my keyboard again. Yeah, the MS product would be the product of choice for people given an option.
I actually read that sentence 4 times, because I was getting all ready to agree with you that people will take the MS product. Whatever the heck flavor of office that comes with the dirt cheap Dell is $150. So I'm sure for some people the cost would drive them to the Open Office, even if Dell charged $20 for support.
Because your average home user buying an off the shelf PC (regardless of who it's from) has no idea what Open Office is.
Dell has an option to include Corel Snapfire Plus. I sincerely doubt that most people have heard of it. Yet there it is.
Even if you provided it as an option, given the choice between a (seemingly) free version of some MS product and Open Office, the average customer would take Open Office.
I doubt that. I think most people would perceive that buying the MS product would make it most likely that they'd be able to exchange documents with others. I'd take a free copy of MS Office, knowing I could download Open Office.
Throw in the bit about most customers expecting to get support from the PC manufacturer for everything that's on there, and you have to talk about training your tech support folks on how to handle Open Office support calls.
Support cost is a real issue. They'd need to collect something from the customer for that.
Because it's obvious that the person misusing the phrase in an effort to sound impressive. It's fucking irritating. People should use language that they understand.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if this guy has ever read a flame war. Who thinks there's a danger of people not speaking freely enough?
I'm tempted to buy this latest DVD incarnation with the 1977 version, but I've read that the quality is poor. Plus I'd hate to buy this installment if a restored version appears shortly. Should I retire the laserdiscs or not?
Aha! So there is a link between the shooting and gaming! QED.
That's pretty darn funny. Nice post.
You could still have hundreds of parties, right?
It's interesting how often the FTL engines fail so that we can watch a traditional chase scene rather than explore the implications of FTL travel.
Why not just delete the whole directory and put this?
echo You win!
Let me try to ask this more clearly.
What is it about being a commodity implies money cannot be a medium to symbolize value?
As you've discussed, printing more more doesn't create value. Creating more coffee does create value. So in some way these items are in different categories of items. One of them is *stuff and the other is stuff.
I'm arguing, but I'm doing so in an effort to understand your point.
Actual stuff is different than money. If I am marooned on an island, I can eat bread. The money is useless.
What does "commodity" mean to you here? I understand that there's a market for money and there's a market for money, both of which are affected by supply and demand.
Why can't there be a market for a "medium to symbolize value"? What property of a commodity makes this wrong?
Well, therein lies the question. Why not also make money on software?
When 50 years old you be, look as good you will not.
A combo box isn't the equivalent for a family.
If people aren't getting a service they value, why [i]should[/i] there be a B&M?
There's an intersection of the sets of land owners and farmers, but they aren't equivalent. Yes, sometimes land stays in the family for generations. But farms have been growing in size for decades due to larger machinery and better herbicides. So a farm with the proper economy of scale (in the midwest) generally includes either rented land or a large mortgage.
Land is taxed heavily by the counties and then subsidized (indirectly) by the Feds.
Land is the biggest cost in the production of food in the US. I can't imagine why you don't think it's a factor.
I think that's very unlikely. There's a price of land at which American farmers can compete. Farm subsidies keep the price of land high, because owning land is way to collect subsidies.
Farmers are often (but not always) land owners, so a sudden drop in subsidies would be very painful. But don't get the idea that without subsidies that all the American farmland would be used for more Starbucks.
Corn isn't especially good for this purpose, but I believe this claim is false. Berkley's study computes the whole process at a 1.3x net fuel gain.
Just a joke.
Right, you have to do something while it compiles.
They haven't found any aliens.
I think your other statements are spot on, but there it is.
Farmers have been using herbicides on corn crops for decades. So it's not as if GM corn caused herbicide use.
One might argue that RoundUp is more dangerous, and I can't really speak to that point. I can tell you that a salesman once drank concentrated atrazine to demonstrate its safety to my father, and he didn't die right away.
Imagine a person buys apples and some books instead of a TV decoder. He submits the receipts to the government and they reply, no you bought the wrong stuff. We deem your use of $40 to be less valuable to society than watching TV.
I actually read that sentence 4 times, because I was getting all ready to agree with you that people will take the MS product. Whatever the heck flavor of office that comes with the dirt cheap Dell is $150. So I'm sure for some people the cost would drive them to the Open Office, even if Dell charged $20 for support.
Dell has an option to include Corel Snapfire Plus. I sincerely doubt that most people have heard of it. Yet there it is.
I doubt that. I think most people would perceive that buying the MS product would make it most likely that they'd be able to exchange documents with others. I'd take a free copy of MS Office, knowing I could download Open Office.
Support cost is a real issue. They'd need to collect something from the customer for that.
Because it's obvious that the person misusing the phrase in an effort to sound impressive. It's fucking irritating. People should use language that they understand.