And that is exactly the problem here. The government can't tell me that I can only exchange my used T.V. for socks. I can, however, say "I only accept cash" or "I only accept credit". The same principle applies here. The government can't tell people what they can and cannot accept to compensate a debt. It's called private property and the freedom of exchange. Me and my friend can exchange a wristwatch for a used television, so why can't we similarly exchange that same wristwatch for cash?
Sure, this kid and Cambridge absolutely have the right to publish this paper. That doesn't mean the bank and its customers aren't going to class-action their ass, though. Their not doing anything illegal, but they are pissing people off.
I don't like lobbyists as much as the next guy. In fact, I hate 'em. Their screwing up the whole system. This entire administration is built around special interest groups. That said, this Net Neutrality grid lock is a good thing. I mean, yeah, it is going to fail for the wrong reasons (like apeasing AT&T), but an internet in the hands of some big cable providers is better than one regulated by the FCC.
The FCC, need I remind you, is responsible for the Fairness Doctrine and the Equal Time Rule, two of the most outrageous and stupid mandates ever created. Anyhow, do you want that to happen with the internet? Some regulations regarding its content? NO! That's exactly what Net Neutrality is trying to do and failing horribly. Well, people, the FCC is going to do the same thing. Read the fine print: Do you know what regulation means? It means its not going to end with a couple of "don't do this" mandates to AT&T and partway down the road were going to ask ourselves "why the hell did we want this again?"
I am so ready for smartphones to be over with. When are we going to get portable wrist computers that display on holoscreens? I don't want the word "phone" in my computing devices anymore. Once some company decides to make a device that just runs on a "data" network, and kills "voice" and "text", phones will finally die, AT&T will finally go out of business and no longer have stranglehold on the market, and I can stop spending $100 on a phone plan every month of my life.
"When the volunteers whose performance improved was re-tested six months later, the benefits appear to have persisted"
Does this mean that the reverse current that made people do worse persisted six months later?
Would you prefer the Internet be controlled by Big Government or Big Corporations?
The government doesn't care what you think and doesn't care if it looses your business.
THINK about it.
Most realistic UI I've seen in a movie is the computer navigation system from Alien. Nothing fancy. That's how it would really be and everyone knows it.
Slashdot Mirror
And that is exactly the problem here. The government can't tell me that I can only exchange my used T.V. for socks. I can, however, say "I only accept cash" or "I only accept credit". The same principle applies here. The government can't tell people what they can and cannot accept to compensate a debt. It's called private property and the freedom of exchange. Me and my friend can exchange a wristwatch for a used television, so why can't we similarly exchange that same wristwatch for cash?
Uncanny Valley, anyone?
This is the shortest and most eloquent defense of Capitalism I have heard in this whole discussion. Thank you.
It would be pretty great if the next line of Nexus phones were called Nexus 6 and then the ISS could update its robots brains to that too.
Sure, this kid and Cambridge absolutely have the right to publish this paper. That doesn't mean the bank and its customers aren't going to class-action their ass, though. Their not doing anything illegal, but they are pissing people off.
...did he just say grokked?
I don't like lobbyists as much as the next guy. In fact, I hate 'em. Their screwing up the whole system. This entire administration is built around special interest groups. That said, this Net Neutrality grid lock is a good thing. I mean, yeah, it is going to fail for the wrong reasons (like apeasing AT&T), but an internet in the hands of some big cable providers is better than one regulated by the FCC. The FCC, need I remind you, is responsible for the Fairness Doctrine and the Equal Time Rule, two of the most outrageous and stupid mandates ever created. Anyhow, do you want that to happen with the internet? Some regulations regarding its content? NO! That's exactly what Net Neutrality is trying to do and failing horribly. Well, people, the FCC is going to do the same thing. Read the fine print: Do you know what regulation means? It means its not going to end with a couple of "don't do this" mandates to AT&T and partway down the road were going to ask ourselves "why the hell did we want this again?"
I am so ready for smartphones to be over with. When are we going to get portable wrist computers that display on holoscreens? I don't want the word "phone" in my computing devices anymore. Once some company decides to make a device that just runs on a "data" network, and kills "voice" and "text", phones will finally die, AT&T will finally go out of business and no longer have stranglehold on the market, and I can stop spending $100 on a phone plan every month of my life.
"When the volunteers whose performance improved was re-tested six months later, the benefits appear to have persisted" Does this mean that the reverse current that made people do worse persisted six months later?
Would you prefer the Internet be controlled by Big Government or Big Corporations? The government doesn't care what you think and doesn't care if it looses your business. THINK about it.
Fraud? Thanks for your input, Karl.
Most realistic UI I've seen in a movie is the computer navigation system from Alien. Nothing fancy. That's how it would really be and everyone knows it.
I'm glad someone said it. Thank you.