And Lara Logan's firing, or rather suspension, or at least a long unwanted vacation from 60 minutes after airing that, um. false Benghazi piece by Morgan Jones who turned out to be Dylan Davies with a different story for US government agencies - Surely 60 minutes apologizes sufficiently when it turns out to be made up!
Oracle may be ("...one the more reputable companies..."). Corporations are by design unaccountable, hierarchical, not democratic. So they can do whatever their structure can get away with, and everyone is supposed to sit back and allow the process of capital maximization all the room it wants. It's not even that the ends justify the means, it's that the means are justified by the unquestionable right to lean towards the end, and you have no right to even ask what that end might be. Put another way, it's evil.
Yes! This guy's job is to overcome inertia and work through the bureaucracies at the top in order to get things done that need to be done - with paid administrative staff and budgets and great health care, transportation, etc. And he just whines about how much work there is to do and how hard it is. What a complete baby! I have no sympathy for an elite bureaucrat who does nothing but complain about how much work his super-perked job actually is and how his superiors are incompetent (his job is to get things going). He can work just as hard at 2 -3 jobs at near-minimum wage and forget about having any real effect on society, like millions of people that he is actually working for.
Enriching the corporation at the expense of the customer, taking advantage of the customer and their data, we already have models for that, and for how it evolves, Those last-generation corporate models, like IBM or Microsoft, tell us that wildly successful corporations won't change until the economic environment around them changes, then they'll change enough to keep riding the crest of the wave (they'll buy new technologies to sell, or get on board what is proving to be a winning strategy). But while they are minting money in the current situation, they won't change it, in fact they'll work to keep things as they are.
Google bough Boston Dynamics, otherwise a four-legged vending machine might be a possibility In any case, does this make you feel we (global "we") are paying way too much for our carmelized-sugar water?
I too am sick of and disappointed in the inaccurate and unsourced assumptions that presume government processes are less efficient that for-profit processes. My unsourced opinion is they're both about equally inefficient, but the for-profit solutions cost more.
That's it then. Time to market an upward-facing flak cannon, with radar, that disables drones when they fly over my property. Launches a thin filament and yanks the thing down.
But the technology hasn't been "perfected" yet, of course. Using terrorist-target fuels and generating kilo-year-toxic waste really kills the attraction. So much so that you need military-grade oversight and liability limited by law in order to enable it. Somehow though, this is considered acceptable, and the industry is stuck there.
So the goal is (correct me if I'm misunderstanding) to have your choice, whatever it might be, available, identified, and enforced when you are dying, even if you're not of sound mind to help enforce it.
So let's work towards: ----letting people know what all their options are when dying, ----maybe making some options available that don't legally exist yet, if you find you want that. ----getting them - that's you - to choose you option(s) in advance, authorize it, and choose executors to help enforce it. ----eliminating the potential for slippery slopes (like being forced to die before you might be ready)
Because stuff doesn't change on its own. Most of the above is available today. Fill out a POLST with your doctor, or get a blank and fill it out and sign it, with witnesses, today. As far as stuff that's not available yet, Oregon and Washington have a Death with Dignity act.
This might be the ultimate fate of FB and other social sites: to avoid being mis-represented or privacy-violated people may choose to delete their profiles and content.
But definitely not risking reversal once the convict has been executed. There's been a pretty high rate (significantly > 0!) of wrongly convicted people on death row. I guess the solution to this problem is to kill them more quickly - ?
Slashdot Mirror
And Lara Logan's firing, or rather suspension, or at least a long unwanted vacation from 60 minutes after airing that, um. false Benghazi piece by Morgan Jones who turned out to be Dylan Davies with a different story for US government agencies - Surely 60 minutes apologizes sufficiently when it turns out to be made up!
Oracle may be (" ...one the more reputable companies..."). Corporations are by design unaccountable, hierarchical, not democratic. So they can do whatever their structure can get away with, and everyone is supposed to sit back and allow the process of capital maximization all the room it wants. It's not even that the ends justify the means, it's that the means are justified by the unquestionable right to lean towards the end, and you have no right to even ask what that end might be. Put another way, it's evil.
Yes! This guy's job is to overcome inertia and work through the bureaucracies at the top in order to get things done that need to be done - with paid administrative staff and budgets and great health care, transportation, etc. And he just whines about how much work there is to do and how hard it is. What a complete baby!
I have no sympathy for an elite bureaucrat who does nothing but complain about how much work his super-perked job actually is and how his superiors are incompetent (his job is to get things going). He can work just as hard at 2 -3 jobs at near-minimum wage and forget about having any real effect on society, like millions of people that he is actually working for.
Enriching the corporation at the expense of the customer, taking advantage of the customer and their data, we already have models for that, and for how it evolves,
Those last-generation corporate models, like IBM or Microsoft, tell us that wildly successful corporations won't change until the economic environment around them changes, then they'll change enough to keep riding the crest of the wave (they'll buy new technologies to sell, or get on board what is proving to be a winning strategy). But while they are minting money in the current situation, they won't change it, in fact they'll work to keep things as they are.
Google bough Boston Dynamics, otherwise a four-legged vending machine might be a possibility
In any case, does this make you feel we (global "we") are paying way too much for our carmelized-sugar water?
I too am sick of and disappointed in the inaccurate and unsourced assumptions that presume government processes are less efficient that for-profit processes. My unsourced opinion is they're both about equally inefficient, but the for-profit solutions cost more.
Thanks for linking to the Royal Pardon - just the wording of that made my day.
I'm inclined to interpret this as a nod from Bill that every action still counts as a move in his game. Can't ever turn it off.
"War fishing".
That's it then. Time to market an upward-facing flak cannon, with radar, that disables drones when they fly over my property. Launches a thin filament and yanks the thing down.
I too was wondering if it snows CO2 flakes.
I wonder how Switzerland's guaranteed minimum income initiative is working out? Is everyone quitting their jobs to live in minimal-standards misery?
Thank you Matt Damon.
In other news, Microsoft is marketing a line of edibles ("Blue Food") and an app that will tell you when to eat it.
But the technology hasn't been "perfected" yet, of course. Using terrorist-target fuels and generating kilo-year-toxic waste really kills the attraction. So much so that you need military-grade oversight and liability limited by law in order to enable it. Somehow though, this is considered acceptable, and the industry is stuck there.
So the goal is (correct me if I'm misunderstanding) to have your choice, whatever it might be, available, identified, and enforced when you are dying, even if you're not of sound mind to help enforce it.
So let's work towards:
----letting people know what all their options are when dying,
----maybe making some options available that don't legally exist yet, if you find you want that.
----getting them - that's you - to choose you option(s) in advance, authorize it, and choose executors to help enforce it.
----eliminating the potential for slippery slopes (like being forced to die before you might be ready)
Because stuff doesn't change on its own.
Most of the above is available today. Fill out a POLST with your doctor, or get a blank and fill it out and sign it, with witnesses, today.
As far as stuff that's not available yet, Oregon and Washington have a Death with Dignity act.
i'm not buying it until they shrink the pixels to zero too.
But if they're just harmless water and carbon, why do they need to be dumped beyond easy reach? Hmmmm?
This is about my level of faith in the Cloud too. It's out there and it works for you, until it's not and it doesn't.
Agreed, FWIW. I love (loved?) the Winamp interface. I just wish it supported DLNA.
This might be the ultimate fate of FB and other social sites: to avoid being mis-represented or privacy-violated people may choose to delete their profiles and content.
>>perhaps even risking parole....
But definitely not risking reversal once the convict has been executed. There's been a pretty high rate (significantly > 0!) of wrongly convicted people on death row. I guess the solution to this problem is to kill them more quickly - ?
Don't they know that boycotts don't work?
Somebody please tell them, so we can go back to killing our convicts with propofol instead of just impunity.
with a capital "P", whatever its name is.
As others have said in other ways, this isn't compromised from the beginning, how?
Then I would also assume that a Court employee would be preoccupied with, um, fairness and justice. And obviously wrong both times.