No. You'll be sitting here with me, answering my stupid questions and being videotaped. If we like your answers, they'll be broadcast. If we don't, they'll be destroyed.
The real root of capitalism is the use of money to make more money.
Funny enough, it isn't. In a perfect capitalist world, profit would be impossible. The impurities in the system make profit possible at all.
A perfect capitalist model would enable everyone to compete with everyone, thus forcing everyone to lower production cost to the bare minimum and only allowing to sell at this cost because a perfectly informed demand side would only buy products that satisfy their demand and, since all the products do this because all producers also know perfectly what demand exists, would then decide based on the lowest cost.
The very fact that profit is possible already shows that this is not a capitalist model we're living in.
Yeah, you can leave them there, we already got a vast load of religious nutjobs recently, what we'd need more of is sane people who can actually work and pay for the sponges.
In a system where the only way to get to the top as a politician is to amass a LOT of money and the only way of doing this is to sell yourself to corporations, how can this possibly end without corruption?
Retirement in the way we run it is a modern concept. That's correct. Retirement itself isn't. In central Europe for example it was customary that at some point, the older farmer handed over his property to his oldest son/daughter and in return he was entitled to being supported by him, first by custom but eventually by law. Depending on the general financial situation, this could take various forms from having the right to your own little room and being allowed to eat with the others to having your own house on the property with your own servants.
This of course isn't really working in a world where such traditions no longer exist, but people weren't sent out into the woods when they could no longer work or at least no work at the same level of efficiency either. Civilization didn't start at the invention of social security.
I was just wondering that. Over here, judges tend to be VERY upset at people and organizations that obviously just waste their time and get VERY creative when it comes to getting back at them.
What it does is create a hash of a face it sees. Whether that hash gets stored somewhere is anyone's guess.
Now, the hash cannot be reversed to produce my face, much like the hash of a password cannot. But what can be done is checking whether my face creates the same hash.
So no, you cannot take a terrorist's cellphone and flip through it to get everyone he was in contact with. What you can do, though, is compare the results of hashes that are stored with the hashes other "suspects" (read: someone you need some reason to arrest) faces produce.
Actually it was supposed to be that the production means are in private hands along with the purchasing power to buy those produced goods and services. It was never supposed to allow the producing side to determine what gets produced, the original idea required that the demand side chooses those products that deliver to the expectation, thus enabling those that produce what is in demand to continue producing while those whose products do not meet the demand will either have to change their products or perish.
Right now the system is rigged so that the producer decides what may be produced. And that's more of a planned economy with the difference being that the private sector does the planning instead of the state. Other than that, it's a carbon copy of the communist model.
Yup, that's what the Reagan administration thought, too. They, too, forgot about blood donations and people who need them. Who then in turn infect their spouses and future kids.
Even they back then eventually understood why this is not going to work out, so I am confident you'll eventually see it, too.
Because religion is one of the reasons AIDS could spread like it did in the US.
The first cases were reported in late 1980/early 1981. It took researchers (at least those who did actually bother to give a shit) almost a year to trace it back to their "patient 0" who passed on the virus often years before, with reports reaching back into the 1970s. No later than this moment it was a given that this is a time bomb the population needs to be warned of. What they learned was they're dealing with an incurable, nearly unknown infection with an incubation time of years, and they even understood the infection route: Body fluids. I.e. mainly unprotected sexual intercourse and swapping of needles of drug addicts.
The Reagan administration did... NOTHING AT ALL. It only affects the fags and druggies? Great! Issue a warning? Are you nuts, the less of those two scourges, the better!
Only when they noticed that it does affect people who need blood transfusions and, guess what, drug addicts need money and sell blood, only then they slowly and VERY reluctantly started attempts to fight it.
It's also good news for the children of crack hoes that were infected while not born yet.
The attitude you display here is exactly what made AIDS the problem it is today. In the 80s, we could probably have found a way to stop it. But it only hits the fags, so who gives a shit, let the wrath of god hit the fags.
Fucking religious, kill the damn lot with fire and we'll all be better off!
I don't care that consoles exist. What bothers me is that more and more studios think they can get away with creating mediocre console games and then do a half assed port.
About the games, well, take the Tropico series and watch its development as the shift towards consoles increased, culminating in the train wreck that T5 is. RUSE is another great example of sitting there and wondering why the hell the game is playing like a hog until you find out that this is the only way it could be made playable with a controller. And I don't want to talk about Supreme Commander 2, where one of the greatest strategy games got a successor that was basically reduced to "produce as much as you can, then nuke the enemy commander".
And yes, while it bothers me that menu design and the way to navigate it is horribly clumsy with mouse and keyboard because it's designed for a controller, that's not even the thing that really bothers me with RTS games. It's that the games themselves got way easier and less detailed. Tropico 4 still retained a bit of the variety and complexity that its predecessors had. With T5 they went off the deep end, resulting in a handful of buildings to choose from (yes, even after upgrading to a later tech level) and stripping a lot of options and little things you could fiddle and tweak. Same with Supreme Commander. SC1 offered huge maps and a vast variety of units that you could combine differently to create a near infinite amount of strategic options. SC2 had tiny maps, a handful of units to work with and basically no strategical element.
I'm pretty sure if I spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it I could come up with more examples, but I guess it should illustrate the point.
What bothers me is that genres I enjoy get butchered to cater to a market that doesn't really seem to be interested in them in the first place. How'd you enjoy it if the next incarnation of some action RPG got simplified so people can play it with keyboard and mouse to make it even at highest difficulty no longer a challenge when you play it with a sensible controller?
Slashdot Mirror
No. You'll be sitting here with me, answering my stupid questions and being videotaped. If we like your answers, they'll be broadcast. If we don't, they'll be destroyed.
The real root of capitalism is the use of money to make more money.
Funny enough, it isn't. In a perfect capitalist world, profit would be impossible. The impurities in the system make profit possible at all.
A perfect capitalist model would enable everyone to compete with everyone, thus forcing everyone to lower production cost to the bare minimum and only allowing to sell at this cost because a perfectly informed demand side would only buy products that satisfy their demand and, since all the products do this because all producers also know perfectly what demand exists, would then decide based on the lowest cost.
The very fact that profit is possible already shows that this is not a capitalist model we're living in.
Yeah, you can leave them there, we already got a vast load of religious nutjobs recently, what we'd need more of is sane people who can actually work and pay for the sponges.
In a system where the only way to get to the top as a politician is to amass a LOT of money and the only way of doing this is to sell yourself to corporations, how can this possibly end without corruption?
If the husband wants it, why not? Simply take her and throw her away, then buy a new one.
Why should he be different, care to explain?
The problem is not new, it's old. The main problem is that nobody dares to change it.
Would actually be a more correct flag for ISIS. What better than a flag with dildos for a bunch of dicks?
Retirement in the way we run it is a modern concept. That's correct. Retirement itself isn't. In central Europe for example it was customary that at some point, the older farmer handed over his property to his oldest son/daughter and in return he was entitled to being supported by him, first by custom but eventually by law. Depending on the general financial situation, this could take various forms from having the right to your own little room and being allowed to eat with the others to having your own house on the property with your own servants.
This of course isn't really working in a world where such traditions no longer exist, but people weren't sent out into the woods when they could no longer work or at least no work at the same level of efficiency either. Civilization didn't start at the invention of social security.
Come over to Europe! We could use a few immigrants that can read and write and maybe even have some marketable skills for a change.
And you think that's going to happen? In this or any administration?
I was just wondering that. Over here, judges tend to be VERY upset at people and organizations that obviously just waste their time and get VERY creative when it comes to getting back at them.
Explain again how it's in any way your business how two (or whatever number) of people fuck?
The horror portion here is that these people have to take those jobs.
You think you'll be asked for your opinion?
"Worked" is relative. It wouldn't today. Few of the nomadic people of old reached 80 years of age.
I no longer need to buy expensive machines when I need to break just one key or find the clear text for a singe hash!
I always wanted to steal identities, but the large up-front costs always made me shy away from it. But no more!
Thank you, Amazon!
What it does is create a hash of a face it sees. Whether that hash gets stored somewhere is anyone's guess.
Now, the hash cannot be reversed to produce my face, much like the hash of a password cannot. But what can be done is checking whether my face creates the same hash.
So no, you cannot take a terrorist's cellphone and flip through it to get everyone he was in contact with. What you can do, though, is compare the results of hashes that are stored with the hashes other "suspects" (read: someone you need some reason to arrest) faces produce.
I somehow doubt I get Aliexpress on the list of "trusted suppliers", but thank you.
Actually it was supposed to be that the production means are in private hands along with the purchasing power to buy those produced goods and services. It was never supposed to allow the producing side to determine what gets produced, the original idea required that the demand side chooses those products that deliver to the expectation, thus enabling those that produce what is in demand to continue producing while those whose products do not meet the demand will either have to change their products or perish.
Right now the system is rigged so that the producer decides what may be produced. And that's more of a planned economy with the difference being that the private sector does the planning instead of the state. Other than that, it's a carbon copy of the communist model.
Yup, that's what the Reagan administration thought, too. They, too, forgot about blood donations and people who need them. Who then in turn infect their spouses and future kids.
Even they back then eventually understood why this is not going to work out, so I am confident you'll eventually see it, too.
Because religion is one of the reasons AIDS could spread like it did in the US.
The first cases were reported in late 1980/early 1981. It took researchers (at least those who did actually bother to give a shit) almost a year to trace it back to their "patient 0" who passed on the virus often years before, with reports reaching back into the 1970s. No later than this moment it was a given that this is a time bomb the population needs to be warned of. What they learned was they're dealing with an incurable, nearly unknown infection with an incubation time of years, and they even understood the infection route: Body fluids. I.e. mainly unprotected sexual intercourse and swapping of needles of drug addicts.
The Reagan administration did ... NOTHING AT ALL. It only affects the fags and druggies? Great! Issue a warning? Are you nuts, the less of those two scourges, the better!
Only when they noticed that it does affect people who need blood transfusions and, guess what, drug addicts need money and sell blood, only then they slowly and VERY reluctantly started attempts to fight it.
It's also good news for the children of crack hoes that were infected while not born yet.
The attitude you display here is exactly what made AIDS the problem it is today. In the 80s, we could probably have found a way to stop it. But it only hits the fags, so who gives a shit, let the wrath of god hit the fags.
Fucking religious, kill the damn lot with fire and we'll all be better off!
Sounds like you suck at designing sensible products, Apple.
But lobbying for monopolies is so anti-capitalist it hurts.
But I guess capitalism today means "whatever benefits the corporations".
I don't care that consoles exist. What bothers me is that more and more studios think they can get away with creating mediocre console games and then do a half assed port.
About the games, well, take the Tropico series and watch its development as the shift towards consoles increased, culminating in the train wreck that T5 is. RUSE is another great example of sitting there and wondering why the hell the game is playing like a hog until you find out that this is the only way it could be made playable with a controller. And I don't want to talk about Supreme Commander 2, where one of the greatest strategy games got a successor that was basically reduced to "produce as much as you can, then nuke the enemy commander".
And yes, while it bothers me that menu design and the way to navigate it is horribly clumsy with mouse and keyboard because it's designed for a controller, that's not even the thing that really bothers me with RTS games. It's that the games themselves got way easier and less detailed. Tropico 4 still retained a bit of the variety and complexity that its predecessors had. With T5 they went off the deep end, resulting in a handful of buildings to choose from (yes, even after upgrading to a later tech level) and stripping a lot of options and little things you could fiddle and tweak. Same with Supreme Commander. SC1 offered huge maps and a vast variety of units that you could combine differently to create a near infinite amount of strategic options. SC2 had tiny maps, a handful of units to work with and basically no strategical element.
I'm pretty sure if I spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it I could come up with more examples, but I guess it should illustrate the point.
What bothers me is that genres I enjoy get butchered to cater to a market that doesn't really seem to be interested in them in the first place. How'd you enjoy it if the next incarnation of some action RPG got simplified so people can play it with keyboard and mouse to make it even at highest difficulty no longer a challenge when you play it with a sensible controller?