I don't know about you, but I don't vote for big money. The money they spend is wasted on me. However, it does provide a good reference to who the politicians' owners are. It's not the money's fault when a corrupt politician takes it. And it's not just the individuals. We have to vote out the institutional party. And the thing is, if you can elect a politician to change the rules, then you already solved the problem. The fact is that nothing has to change except everybody's vote.
I'm going to play the ad hominem card here and say that anything that comes from Feinstein should immediately be tossed into the round file and shredded. What kind of bacon does she take home that keeps people voting for her?
Not a good idea if there are caps on your service. The one and only solution is to elect politicians who will turn the ISPs into common carriers and make the internet a public utility (and defund the NSA, bring the troops home, and legalize weed, etc) Everything else is lipstick on a pig and polishing turds.
That, is outright censorship. If you want to target the users for using it to do something entirely questionable, fine, but leave the developers alone...
A union is in the business of selling labor, which is just another commodity like oil and orange futures. Naturally, like any other business, it seeks to protect and control its market.
Again, your experience is entirely anecdotal and personal, and it is obscuring the basics. The answer to everything lies in the primitive lizard brain. There you will find that unions are indistinguishable from any other powerful institution. People want power and money so they can get the girl.. The entire back and forth is about sex.
In Canada, for example, both corporate and union political donations are banned.
Hopefully the American's 1st amendment can prevent that. It is censorship. Money has no influence of its own. It comes purely from man's fleshy, fickle, and capricious desires. You all are attacking the wrong target. It is passing the blame onto the totally inanimate object. It's like blaming the crescent wrench for being a lousy hammer.
Money, like speech, only has the value and power a person gives to it. There is nothing intrinsic about either, and it has absolutely no force of its own. Everybody here is wagging the dog in a quest for convenience and expediency. Go after the desire, not the object of that desire.
...but in many places you must belong to the IBEW to work at any of them.
Just another business protecting its turf. I do believe there is a process of de-certification that people can actually vote on. Your point of view is singular. There are other angles that illustrate the fundamentals of nature that motivate everything. The desire for power takes many forms.
Whoa! That was intense! Where did I say anything about "liberal/conservative" or Koch and Soros? What to they have to do with the price of rice? I am merely one who believes that "no law" means no law... Your post completely misses the mark, to the point of being completely off-topic.
You are overlooking the fundamentals of business. A union is a bureaucracy with all the same profit motives as all others. Try to widen your view a bit.
How is money not speech? Is any force involved? Do you have to vote for the guy with the biggest budget? Is mass media your only source of information? If so, then the problem is not the crooked politician, or the guy making the offer. If you want to take the money out of politics, then stop voting for big money. That is the only way you can win. Prohibition is tyranny, and I for one, will never vote for such a thing.
Why does everybody treat unions different from any other corporation? They are simply a competing interest in the game of capitalism, but they operate in exactly the same way, with exactly the same style hierarchies. To single out the unions is only taking sides. Attempting to destroy one cartel only assists the others.
..or would you recognize that as a gross abuse of free speech, much like your plan to make political donations illegal? Seriously, why don't you stop trying to undermine the 1st Amendment?
Exactly... If they want to restrict speech, they must amend the constitution. However, more and more people are starting to agree that the 1st amendment "goes too far", so repealing or severely restricting it should be an easy go. Lessig is barking up the wrong tree without a paddle.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about you, but I don't vote for big money. The money they spend is wasted on me. However, it does provide a good reference to who the politicians' owners are. It's not the money's fault when a corrupt politician takes it. And it's not just the individuals. We have to vote out the institutional party. And the thing is, if you can elect a politician to change the rules, then you already solved the problem. The fact is that nothing has to change except everybody's vote.
I'm going to play the ad hominem card here and say that anything that comes from Feinstein should immediately be tossed into the round file and shredded. What kind of bacon does she take home that keeps people voting for her?
...p2p caching...
Not a good idea if there are caps on your service. The one and only solution is to elect politicians who will turn the ISPs into common carriers and make the internet a public utility (and defund the NSA, bring the troops home, and legalize weed, etc) Everything else is lipstick on a pig and polishing turds.
...the idea that anything at all is "safe" in the cloud...is hilariously wrong.
Exactly. There's No Such Animal
A CLI not backed by a decent shell is miserable, as was demonstrated by ms-dos.
Eh, doskey made it okay. And what can't be done with a .bat file? :-)
NSLs should be made illegal
Well, you need to elect people who will make it so. The majority has spoken, and despite what mass media says, they approve.
I would say, do not step outside. It puts you on their turf. Talk through the screen door or a window.
That, is outright censorship. If you want to target the users for using it to do something entirely questionable, fine, but leave the developers alone...
There's the problem right there. You are supposed to target the believers. They are the ones at fault and should be sanctioned.
It's up to the voters whether they want to keep reelecting politicians who permit this if the state's attorney general doesn't sue.
...Or did you mean oceanfront instead of beachfront...
Yes, we all know the song
No, it's a California earthquake joke.
Poe's law?
A union is in the business of selling labor, which is just another commodity like oil and orange futures. Naturally, like any other business, it seeks to protect and control its market.
Again, your experience is entirely anecdotal and personal, and it is obscuring the basics. The answer to everything lies in the primitive lizard brain. There you will find that unions are indistinguishable from any other powerful institution. People want power and money so they can get the girl.. The entire back and forth is about sex.
In Canada, for example, both corporate and union political donations are banned.
Hopefully the American's 1st amendment can prevent that. It is censorship. Money has no influence of its own. It comes purely from man's fleshy, fickle, and capricious desires. You all are attacking the wrong target. It is passing the blame onto the totally inanimate object. It's like blaming the crescent wrench for being a lousy hammer.
Money, like speech, only has the value and power a person gives to it. There is nothing intrinsic about either, and it has absolutely no force of its own. Everybody here is wagging the dog in a quest for convenience and expediency. Go after the desire, not the object of that desire.
...but in many places you must belong to the IBEW to work at any of them.
Just another business protecting its turf. I do believe there is a process of de-certification that people can actually vote on. Your point of view is singular. There are other angles that illustrate the fundamentals of nature that motivate everything. The desire for power takes many forms.
Money is not speech.
Why not?
Whoa! That was intense! Where did I say anything about "liberal/conservative" or Koch and Soros? What to they have to do with the price of rice? I am merely one who believes that "no law" means no law... Your post completely misses the mark, to the point of being completely off-topic.
You are overlooking the fundamentals of business. A union is a bureaucracy with all the same profit motives as all others. Try to widen your view a bit.
How is money not speech? Is any force involved? Do you have to vote for the guy with the biggest budget? Is mass media your only source of information? If so, then the problem is not the crooked politician, or the guy making the offer. If you want to take the money out of politics, then stop voting for big money. That is the only way you can win. Prohibition is tyranny, and I for one, will never vote for such a thing.
Why does everybody treat unions different from any other corporation? They are simply a competing interest in the game of capitalism, but they operate in exactly the same way, with exactly the same style hierarchies. To single out the unions is only taking sides. Attempting to destroy one cartel only assists the others.
..or would you recognize that as a gross abuse of free speech, much like your plan to make political donations illegal? Seriously, why don't you stop trying to undermine the 1st Amendment?
Exactly... If they want to restrict speech, they must amend the constitution. However, more and more people are starting to agree that the 1st amendment "goes too far", so repealing or severely restricting it should be an easy go. Lessig is barking up the wrong tree without a paddle.
Grow lights don't work?
You can freely exercise anything you want, including your sphincter. That doesn't entitle you to any tax exemptions that I don't get.