Hey if you don't like the RIAA don't buy their music. Really that simple. No, not that simple. Close your eyes and imagine a world where music could be copied freely from one media to another without threat of lawsuit, digital rights mangement, unplayable CDs, etc... Is it so hard to do? Well it's STILL like that in most countries and it was that way in the US until recently. People have just lost/are losing this pleasent freedom and your comment is to "don't buy their music". Well, there is political resistance outside of shopping and if you weren't busy defending the right of a mutli-billion dollar industry to sue a 15 year old we might at least end up with the fair use rights we had 5 years ago. But I guess you would rather be a slave to the RIAA and shell out for what music you do buy for the rest of your life. But hey, I guess blaming the victim is easier than feeling sympathy for you. P.S. A politically powerful, child suing industry that actively stifles technological innovation and the spread of music really is an "evil do'er".
Well I feel pity for you since not only can't you tell the difference between criminal theft and copyright violation, you are actually appear to believe that sharing music (something done and celebrated in one form or another for thousands of years) is not ethical. Allowing the RIAA to dictate the terms of the debate to you ("theft") is sad, but actually setting your moral compass by them is just pitiful.
Talked politics with some French people last week and they pointed out (quite correctly) that the main reason France is not going to war for the same is the same reason the US did. Oil. People can pretend to asscribe humanitarian motivations to either government, but I would argue a quick look at the historical record shows that humanitarian reasons have more to do with covering self-interest than genunine political belief.
Sure, if you are a capitialist who doesn't have to work for a living and relys on others to make money for you - it's obvioulsy a problem. However if you have to work for a living....
Grenda was not invaded by any country other than the United States. Cuban contractors to build an airport don't count and even if Fidel himself came to Cuba (I don't think he ever did) it's no excuse to invade. The US created the bloodshed, it didn't stop it. Even Maggie Thatcher thought Reagen was wrong to invade this tiny country.
Wrong. Human economic motivation is driven by two principal impulses: selfishness and compassion.
So your evidence that humans are motivated by selfishness and compassion is that people and socities have varying degrees of compassion/selfishness??! Why not say love and hate, or good and evil (the religious approach), plain and pleasure(Bentham's approach), or whatever else you like? It should be relatively easy to box in and explain every human action (or society) as being a member of one category or the other (if not varying degrees of both). Try it, I'm sure you are smart enough to do it. After all such statements are broad enough to be both proved and disproved by anyone who knows a few things about the world, but ignorant enough to realize the worthlessness of such statements.
It is generalizations like these that help explain why economics is not a science even though some of its more vocal practioneers like to claim so. This is just another generalization in a long list of sweeping generalizations that anybody can find evidence for. BTW, why you may believe that Chinese don't attend AI meetings (not true in my AI experience) it hardly proves your racist conjecture "that compassion is almost non-existent as a component of economic motivation in Chinese society". Look at elderly care in Chineese society versus the West, and they would score quite well in your compassion category. If you really believe that only two simple drives can explain even the motivations (nevermind actions) of a just a single complex human mind (nevermind billions of people) living in tbe modern world I think you have some more living to do.
Okay, so we are talking about "poor" in the US now instead of people on welfare that clears some things up but also confuses things too. The reference you cited didn't explain what they meant by poverty rate which is important because depending on the metric (which changes quite frequently) you can be talking about a few % to 30+% of the population. Having said that I will comment briefly on some of your arguments. 1)As far as health care goes in France versus US, I don't think an emergency situation is the best basis for comparison, but since you picked it here is a New England Journal of Medicine article (which I think you would agree has less political bias than your reference) detailing ~700 heat deaths in Chicago in 1995 for a 3 day period. The time period was much longer in the recent Paris heat wave and I think the statistics compare favorably for France. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short /335/2/84 2)With regards to home ownership I agree that this is an important measure, but you must keep in mind that Europe is much more densely populated than the US and land is thus more expensive. Many people in New York who are no poor don't own homes, because of a similar population density problem. 3)Car ownership also varies with population density, so I won't hold car ownership as a good poverty indicator. 4)TV is going to be less popular in a country where there is less to watch (how many Dutch or even German television shows are there versus English?? 5)Air conditioning ownership is also a function of geography, I wouldn't make that comparison for poverty. 6)Microwave ovens? Okay, you've got me on that one.:)
You have no idea what you are talking about, I'm surprised this was moderated as "insightful". I'm a Canadian currently working in the US and my wife (who is a doctor BTW) and I paid $323/month for health insurance via Kaiser until my she got her own health insurance as part of her residency program. Having been an adult patient in both Georgia and Alberta/BC the health care is definitely better in Canada - faster and more competent physicians. Furthermore at our income level last year the higher taxes we would have paid in Canada were offset by these enormous health care costs such that there was virtually no difference in cost between the two systems (Canada was a bit cheaper). You should also keep in mind that it is significantly harder to practise medicine in Canada if you are a foreign medical graduate (my wife is Romanian) so the quality of doctors may be higher in Canada (my sample size is too small to say for sure). As far as "wage limits" goes it is true that this may mean some doctors leave Canada for the US (although I doubt many). However it also means that patients are less likely to have unneeded (and sometimes dangerous) procedures performed on them so the doctor can make money. This happens ROUTINELY in US hospitals with this payment scheme, despite it being unethical. Also if you want to wait 9-12 months for eye surgery (or most other surgeries) in Canada, you can always pay to have it done much sooner at a private clinic just like in the US. Incidentally the recent waiting lists are the result of budget cuts by the federal government which many speculate is trying to defund the health care system in order to privatize it. It's not the result of the system which treats all Canadians for around 7% of GDP, versus ~13% of GDP in the US. And in case you are wondering, my wife does want to practise in Canada once she finishes her residency here!
"American supposedly heartless society they simply do not realize that our population on welfare is better off than the European middle class" Any statistics to back this up because I for one don't believe it. If you take Western European median income and compare it to anywhere between the 1st and 5th percentile corresponding to the US welfare income I'm sure you'll find the European middle class is WAY better off cash wise. They also get more vacation time and health care, whereas US welfare receiptients get "work for welfare" (forced labour) and Medicaid (if they can navigate the bureaucracy). I've also seen European slums (including Eastern Europe) and I can find as bad or worse here in Atlanta with a 10 minute drive.
How can you say that "MS has an agenda to develop and sell software" and then wonder why the donation of money/licenses to universities is bribery?!@ Is MS some sort of charity with a new agenda to give away things for free? No, it is an organization which exists to make money for its shareholders. It is donating to make money in the long term, taking advantage of the fact that higher education is cash poor and MS is cash rich. Keep in mind that this is an organization has been convicted of serious criminal charges so a little "bigotry" (I would call it well warranted suspiscion) is certainly in order.
185 degrees (not 180) is way too fucking hot to sell coffee at, and who the hell asks for ice in their coffee so they can drink it 15 minutes later? I worked at McDonald's for a 1 1/2 back in the 80s and NOBODY ever asked me for ice in their coffee (drive through or not). I did hear people complain that it was too hot though, because it was! I used to agree with you on this case until I read that link, McDonalds is especially culpable since she offered to settle for a pittance. If you want to keep your coffee hot, use a thermos. That temperature was definitely a safety hazard, which is why all the other restaurants served it at a more reasonable temperature.
I'd like to agree with you, unfortunately the workweek has been *increasing* in the last few decades (France with the 35 hour work week is a recent exception). In the 19th cenutry most people were working the 12 hour workday, it wasn't until there was a huge political campaign, strikes, protests, etc... that the 8 hour workday was won. What makes you think it will be any different in the 21st century?
Interesting you mention the steelworkers doing well, because US steel is both protected by huge tariffs and the industry is heavily unionized. Draw your own conclusions...
Who cares if Verizon can or can't pay back the cash, the state should go after them anyway to deter other companies from trying to pull off the same stunt. If they bankrupt the company it is not a problem for the economy, the company can still run when in Chapter11. The only people who will lose are the shareholders of Verizon, the most important of which no doubt sat on the board of directors planning this rip off. Too bad for them.
I thought 1960s timesharing was nothing more than job submission and process load balancing run on supercomputers. Grid computing can involve 1000s of distributed nodes with millisecond (ethernet) latencies between them, that's not timesharing as far I know. The wheel isn't being reinvented here.
The last "boom" was largely a boom for the rich, whether they are in the US, Mexico or anywhere else. There may be more billionaires in Mexico today than there was before NAFTA, but Mexican workers aren't doing any better. Most of them still can't afford a PC and Internet access. It's true hardware is cheaper today (and much better which is the result of R&D in rich countries not cheap production) but that doesn't mean it compensates falling inflation adjusted wages among the slashdot crowd (mostly male US workers).
Don't get down on yourself and don't train/spend money on courses for a job just because you heard it has good employment prospects now. That's what you did last time and you got burned. Find something you like or at least have a genunine interest in. Maybe it's teaching, maybe's it not but training yourself for whatever the market "wants" right now is a waste of time. Good luck!
reestablish a Jewish homeland in Palestine.. While you provide more history, it is not inaccurate to call an idealogy whose major tenet is creating an ethnically pure "homeland" as racist. Even if the ethnic group in question wanted to establish their "homeland" in Antartica (where no one would have to be displaced) the whole idea still seems racist to me.
"My awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish State with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain -- especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish State." Albert Einstein
It is inevitable that someone will be called on to make a decision that will effect the rest of the group at some time
True, since everything is related to each other. But that doesn't mean that leaders and hierarchy are required. One equitiable (in my mind) way of resolving these types of decisions is for people to have say in the descisions that affect their lives in proportion to the extent that those decisions affect them.
Most humans, by nature, need someone to guide and direct their lives.
It's amazing you can write such a general statement without any sort of evidence. I'm a geneticist, and the last time I checked there was no known gene for wanting to be guided and directed. And what about those who don't want to be guided and controlled? Your statement is more likely a line those with power tell themselves to make themselves feel better when they are controlling others.
"Pretty much every useful piece of technology was developed by a private corporation."
Considering the "private corporation" only came into existence in the last few hundred years it seems a rather dubious claim to make to say the least. In fact Western governments have been funding private ventures (research, exploration, construction projects, etc...) with public monies long before capitalism and private corporations ever existed. Even Chritopher Columbus's voyage to the New World was underwritten with State funds.
In the modern era most of the major technologies were funded by the State, the early development of computers, machine tools, nuclear fission (and bombs), the Internet and now biotechnology have all been funded with public money. The type of invention in the private sector has generally been on applied technology which can be made profitable, for obvious reasons. Not even mammoth corporations like IBM want to spend billions on super conductors, space exploration, one day hoping it will pay off.
Also, last I heard Big Oil was still making money selling gas to retail stations, they aren't a charity or do you know something I don't?
As far as Western governments driving biotech offshore.... that's crazy! Is NCBI offshore? Have you seen the NIH's budget? The whole notion is laughable. The main function of the US government with regards to biotech overseas is to OPEN MARKETS and ENFORCE US patent law to increase profits for US pharma and biotech. Banning cloning (which few Western governments have done by the way) is minor by comparison.
The robots will just cut in line, force us to fetch them snazzy conference badges and listen them drone on about themselves. I don't know which is worse.:)
And while the state will put up $210 million over the next five years for the new center -- Sematech will supply $193 million -- it did not agree to give the consortium any tax breaks or loans, a frequent element of the state's deals with private industry.
So instead of giving them a loan (which taxpayers might possibily be able to collect on some day) New York State taxpayers simply forked over $210 million dollars. Wow, I'm guessing New York state residents are just thrilled over this one.
Incidentally the project is only worth $400 million, so although the State is forking over the majority of the cash although it is getting none of the profits. Needless to say this was all negiotated in secret, which is apparently how it works in a democracy. I know I sound cynical, but it's hard not to be upset watching public money being used for private profit.
Slashdot Mirror
Read what I wrote, I'm not talking about backups. My point is people have more freedom without the DMCA and similar legislation.
Hey if you don't like the RIAA don't buy their music. Really that simple.
No, not that simple. Close your eyes and imagine a world where music could be copied freely from one media to another without threat of lawsuit, digital rights mangement, unplayable CDs, etc... Is it so hard to do? Well it's STILL like that in most countries and it was that way in the US until recently. People have just lost/are losing this pleasent freedom and your comment is to "don't buy their music". Well, there is political resistance outside of shopping and if you weren't busy defending the right of a mutli-billion dollar industry to sue a 15 year old we might at least end up with the fair use rights we had 5 years ago. But I guess you would rather be a slave to the RIAA and shell out for what music you do buy for the rest of your life. But hey, I guess blaming the victim is easier than feeling sympathy for you.
P.S. A politically powerful, child suing industry that actively stifles technological innovation and the spread of music really is an "evil do'er".
Well I feel pity for you since not only can't you tell the difference between criminal theft and copyright violation, you are actually appear to believe that sharing music (something done and celebrated in one form or another for thousands of years) is not ethical. Allowing the RIAA to dictate the terms of the debate to you ("theft") is sad, but actually setting your moral compass by them is just pitiful.
Talked politics with some French people last week and they pointed out (quite correctly) that the main reason France is not going to war for the same is the same reason the US did. Oil. People can pretend to asscribe humanitarian motivations to either government, but I would argue a quick look at the historical record shows that humanitarian reasons have more to do with covering self-interest than genunine political belief.
Sure, if you are a capitialist who doesn't have to work for a living and relys on others to make money for you - it's obvioulsy a problem. However if you have to work for a living....
Grenda was not invaded by any country other than the United States. Cuban contractors to build an airport don't count and even if Fidel himself came to Cuba (I don't think he ever did) it's no excuse to invade. The US created the bloodshed, it didn't stop it. Even Maggie Thatcher thought Reagen was wrong to invade this tiny country.
So your evidence that humans are motivated by selfishness and compassion is that people and socities have varying degrees of compassion/selfishness??! Why not say love and hate, or good and evil (the religious approach), plain and pleasure(Bentham's approach), or whatever else you like? It should be relatively easy to box in and explain every human action (or society) as being a member of one category or the other (if not varying degrees of both). Try it, I'm sure you are smart enough to do it. After all such statements are broad enough to be both proved and disproved by anyone who knows a few things about the world, but ignorant enough to realize the worthlessness of such statements.
It is generalizations like these that help explain why economics is not a science even though some of its more vocal practioneers like to claim so. This is just another generalization in a long list of sweeping generalizations that anybody can find evidence for. BTW, why you may believe that Chinese don't attend AI meetings (not true in my AI experience) it hardly proves your racist conjecture "that compassion is almost non-existent as a component of economic motivation in Chinese society". Look at elderly care in Chineese society versus the West, and they would score quite well in your compassion category. If you really believe that only two simple drives can explain even the motivations (nevermind actions) of a just a single complex human mind (nevermind billions of people) living in tbe modern world I think you have some more living to do.
Okay, so we are talking about "poor" in the US now instead of people on welfare that clears some things up but also confuses things too. The reference you cited didn't explain what they meant by poverty rate which is important because depending on the metric (which changes quite frequently) you can be talking about a few % to 30+% of the population. Having said that I will comment briefly on some of your arguments.t /335/2/84 :)
1)As far as health care goes in France versus US, I don't think an emergency situation is the best basis for comparison, but since you picked it here is a New England Journal of Medicine article (which I think you would agree has less political bias than your reference) detailing ~700 heat deaths in Chicago in 1995 for a 3 day period. The time period was much longer in the recent Paris heat wave and I think the statistics compare favorably for France.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/shor
2)With regards to home ownership I agree that this is an important measure, but you must keep in mind that Europe is much more densely populated than the US and land is thus more expensive. Many people in New York who are no poor don't own homes, because of a similar population density problem.
3)Car ownership also varies with population density, so I won't hold car ownership as a good poverty indicator.
4)TV is going to be less popular in a country where there is less to watch (how many Dutch or even German television shows are there versus English??
5)Air conditioning ownership is also a function of geography, I wouldn't make that comparison for poverty.
6)Microwave ovens? Okay, you've got me on that one.
You have no idea what you are talking about, I'm surprised this was moderated as "insightful".
I'm a Canadian currently working in the US and my wife (who is a doctor BTW) and I paid $323/month for health insurance via Kaiser until my she got her own health insurance as part of her residency program. Having been an adult patient in both Georgia and Alberta/BC the health care is definitely better in Canada - faster and more competent physicians. Furthermore at our income level last year the higher taxes we would have paid in Canada were offset by these enormous health care costs such that there was virtually no difference in cost between the two systems (Canada was a bit cheaper).
You should also keep in mind that it is significantly harder to practise medicine in Canada if you are a foreign medical graduate (my wife is Romanian) so the quality of doctors may be higher in Canada (my sample size is too small to say for sure). As far as "wage limits" goes it is true that this may mean some doctors leave Canada for the US (although I doubt many). However it also means that patients are less likely to have unneeded (and sometimes dangerous) procedures performed on them so the doctor can make money. This happens ROUTINELY in US hospitals with this payment scheme, despite it being unethical.
Also if you want to wait 9-12 months for eye surgery (or most other surgeries) in Canada, you can always pay to have it done much sooner at a private clinic just like in the US. Incidentally the recent waiting lists are the result of budget cuts by the federal government which many speculate is trying to defund the health care system in order to privatize it. It's not the result of the system which treats all Canadians for around 7% of GDP, versus ~13% of GDP in the US.
And in case you are wondering, my wife does want to practise in Canada once she finishes her residency here!
"American supposedly heartless society they simply do not realize that our population on welfare is better off than the European middle class"
Any statistics to back this up because I for one don't believe it. If you take Western European median income and compare it to anywhere between the 1st and 5th percentile corresponding to the US welfare income I'm sure you'll find the European middle class is WAY better off cash wise. They also get more vacation time and health care, whereas US welfare receiptients get "work for welfare" (forced labour) and Medicaid (if they can navigate the bureaucracy). I've also seen European slums (including Eastern Europe) and I can find as bad or worse here in Atlanta with a 10 minute drive.
How can you say that "MS has an agenda to develop and sell software" and then wonder why the donation of money/licenses to universities is bribery?!@ Is MS some sort of charity with a new agenda to give away things for free? No, it is an organization which exists to make money for its shareholders. It is donating to make money in the long term, taking advantage of the fact that higher education is cash poor and MS is cash rich. Keep in mind that this is an organization has been convicted of serious criminal charges so a little "bigotry" (I would call it well warranted suspiscion) is certainly in order.
185 degrees (not 180) is way too fucking hot to sell coffee at, and who the hell asks for ice in their coffee so they can drink it 15 minutes later? I worked at McDonald's for a 1 1/2 back in the 80s and NOBODY ever asked me for ice in their coffee (drive through or not). I did hear people complain that it was too hot though, because it was!
I used to agree with you on this case until I read that link, McDonalds is especially culpable since she offered to settle for a pittance.
If you want to keep your coffee hot, use a thermos. That temperature was definitely a safety hazard, which is why all the other restaurants served it at a more reasonable temperature.
First I've heard of yum, just downloaded it from here:t ml
http://linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/index.p
So far, so good.
I'd like to agree with you, unfortunately the workweek has been *increasing* in the last few decades (France with the 35 hour work week is a recent exception).
In the 19th cenutry most people were working the 12 hour workday, it wasn't until there was a huge political campaign, strikes, protests, etc... that the 8 hour workday was won. What makes you think it will be any different in the 21st century?
Interesting you mention the steelworkers doing well, because US steel is both protected by huge tariffs and the industry is heavily unionized. Draw your own conclusions...
Who cares if Verizon can or can't pay back the cash, the state should go after them anyway to deter other companies from trying to pull off the same stunt. If they bankrupt the company it is not a problem for the economy, the company can still run when in Chapter11. The only people who will lose are the shareholders of Verizon, the most important of which no doubt sat on the board of directors planning this rip off. Too bad for them.
I thought 1960s timesharing was nothing more than job submission and process load balancing run on supercomputers. Grid computing can involve 1000s of distributed nodes with millisecond (ethernet) latencies between them, that's not timesharing as far I know. The wheel isn't being reinvented here.
The last "boom" was largely a boom for the rich, whether they are in the US, Mexico or anywhere else. There may be more billionaires in Mexico today than there was before NAFTA, but Mexican workers aren't doing any better. Most of them still can't afford a PC and Internet access. It's true hardware is cheaper today (and much better which is the result of R&D in rich countries not cheap production) but that doesn't mean it compensates falling inflation adjusted wages among the slashdot crowd (mostly male US workers).
Don't get down on yourself and don't train/spend money on courses for a job just because you heard it has good employment prospects now. That's what you did last time and you got burned. Find something you like or at least have a genunine interest in. Maybe it's teaching, maybe's it not but training yourself for whatever the market "wants" right now is a waste of time. Good luck!
reestablish a Jewish homeland in Palestine..
While you provide more history, it is not inaccurate to call an idealogy whose major tenet is creating an ethnically pure "homeland" as racist. Even if the ethnic group in question wanted to establish their "homeland" in Antartica (where no one would have to be displaced) the whole idea still seems racist to me.
For better interpretations of occupation lexicon read Amira Hass. She writes for Ha'aretz, but I don't *think* this piece appears in the more censored English version.
"My awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the
idea of a Jewish State with borders, an army, and a measure
of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the
inner damage Judaism will sustain -- especially from the
development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks,
against which we have already had to fight strongly, even
without a Jewish State."
Albert Einstein
Do you have a source for the government giving money to ER?
True, since everything is related to each other. But that doesn't mean that leaders and hierarchy are required. One equitiable (in my mind) way of resolving these types of decisions is for people to have say in the descisions that affect their lives in proportion to the extent that those decisions affect them.
Most humans, by nature, need someone to guide and direct their lives.
It's amazing you can write such a general statement without any sort of evidence. I'm a geneticist, and the last time I checked there was no known gene for wanting to be guided and directed. And what about those who don't want to be guided and controlled? Your statement is more likely a line those with power tell themselves to make themselves feel better when they are controlling others.
"Pretty much every useful piece of technology was developed by a private corporation."
Considering the "private corporation" only came into existence in the last few hundred years it seems a rather dubious claim to make to say the least. In fact Western governments have been funding private ventures (research, exploration, construction projects, etc...) with public monies long before capitalism and private corporations ever existed. Even Chritopher Columbus's voyage to the New World was underwritten with State funds.
In the modern era most of the major technologies were funded by the State, the early development of computers, machine tools, nuclear fission (and bombs), the Internet and now biotechnology have all been funded with public money. The type of invention in the private sector has generally been on applied technology which can be made profitable, for obvious reasons. Not even mammoth corporations like IBM want to spend billions on super conductors, space exploration, one day hoping it will pay off.
Also, last I heard Big Oil was still making money selling gas to retail stations, they aren't a charity or do you know something I don't?
As far as Western governments driving biotech offshore.... that's crazy! Is NCBI offshore? Have you seen the NIH's budget? The whole notion is laughable. The main function of the US government with regards to biotech overseas is to OPEN MARKETS and ENFORCE US patent law to increase profits for US pharma and biotech. Banning cloning (which few Western governments have done by the way) is minor by comparison.
If you're a troll, you're a good one.
The robots will just cut in line, force us to fetch them snazzy conference badges and listen them drone on about themselves. I don't know which is worse. :)
So instead of giving them a loan (which taxpayers might possibily be able to collect on some day) New York State taxpayers simply forked over $210 million dollars. Wow, I'm guessing New York state residents are just thrilled over this one.
Incidentally the project is only worth $400 million, so although the State is forking over the majority of the cash although it is getting none of the profits. Needless to say this was all negiotated in secret, which is apparently how it works in a democracy. I know I sound cynical, but it's hard not to be upset watching public money being used for private profit.