we could have kicked unemployment down by a couple ten-thousand by hiring people to wash scrubs and keep things clean, and at the same time reduced bacteria in hospitals, which would have prevented countless infections (actually not countless, some people have done studies on this type of thing).
but no. fuck that. lets fire all the janitors and clotheswashers and invent weird new chemical experiments that probably might work maybe, because some investment banker needs to pay-off the maserati he wrecked on his last coke and whore binge.
SuperGermKiller - what it really kills is all those lazy union laborers fucking up your numbers at your hospital administration job!
this is about massive unemployment that will destabilize society and lead to mass starvation and mass homelessness. there aren't any jobs. when buggy whips went out, there were auto factories. there was Henry Ford, who decided for the hell of it to increase the pay of ALL HIS WORKERS, including janitors, by several multiples. old industries were replaced by new industries. those new industries payed better and they provided more opportunity to improve oneself educationally.
---
now, we have old industries dying, and no new industries replacing them.
any 'new industries' left are not paying better. they are paying worse. they are part time, no health care, no set schedule, no nothing. there are people who work at hospitals now who get no health insurance. thats where we are headed as a society.
there are no Henry Fords nowdays increasing workers pay. those CEOs would be fired in the modern era for 'wasting stockholder value' and sued for lowering stock price.
this is not 'just like the last time'. this time is different. really different.
nobody who controls the machines is going to just give food and housing and water to people.
example? health care. if you are a wal-mart part-time employee, and you get cancer, which something like 1/3 of people will, you have to declare bankruptcy. if you get a splinter in your foot and it gets infected, and you need time off work, you will probably get fired. and wal-mart can make a profit if you die on the job, because of something called 'dead peasant insurance'.
wal-mart, with one of the most advanced IT departments in the world, did not use this new found wealth from machine automation to improve the lives of the people. it used it to cut costs, slash benefits, destroy unions, outsource production to military dictatorships, and so forth and so on.
there are countless other examples.
if these examples keep being ignored, we will be where we were in the early 1900s in europe . . . masses of starving people who had nothing to lose, and so joined revolutionary movements to overthrow the existing governments and try bizarre social experiments that ended in horror.
if not for the crazy people who put linux ontop of a FAT filesystem (dont ask) i probably wouldnt be the successfull IT profes.. i mean.. homeless nutjob i am today.
uhmm dude you just said you want someone to die for hacking into a phone. thats not really considered by most people to be an appropriate punishment for the level of crime allegedly committed
if you read through enough court cases involving the first amendment, for example the recent Thomas Drake case (google FAS.org thomas drake case files), you will find out what happens when we let the first amendment 'slide' a little against people we dislike or disagree with.
precedents used against terrorists (who i do not approve of) and oliver north (who i strongly disagree with) in first amendment cases were later applied to thomas drake.
tahts why you have to protect it no matter who is on the other end of the prosecution. because eventually the government will use any precedent to further restrict that freedom of speech.
the modern organization has everything timed, measured, and decided on down to when you take a shit.
the 'one bad apple defense' has been repeatedly proven to be
1. a classic tactic of modern organizations to insulate themselves from responsibility
2. very often based on utter lies
It was used by the government to act like Abu Grahib was an accident, when it was the direct result of a wide spread policy to approve of and promote 'harsh interrogation' and get rid of the culture that respected Geneva and LOAC
It was used by the government to act like My Lai was an isolated event. In reality, the Army itself collected and documented several other incidents that were similar to My Lai, and hid them in a box on a shelf for decades until they were discovered by journalists and researchers.
It is used by bank CEOs to try to act like they had no idea what their CDO trading desks were doing. Utter nonsense. They had people screaming at them about what was happening - those people got fired because they were hurting short-term profits and presented political risks to the executives.
and on and on and on
the 'one bad apple' theory has been proven time and time again to be utter lies in the modern corporate organization.
if you go into a courtroom defending Bradley Manning or Wikileaks against Espionage Act charges, you are going to want as much pro-first-amendment precedent as you can get. and you also want as much pro-hacking precedent as you can get.
that means that you want a bunch of cases on the books where hackers and journalists did not go to jail for doing their job, and whistleblowers did not get punished.
is murdock a scumbag? hey, thats irrelevant. if murdock and/or his organization get massively punished for this, then the courts will use that precedent to justify sending people like Wikileaks to jail for even longer.
Fun fact: out of Obama's several espionage act prosecutions, several also involve the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Manning has many, many charges against him that are from the CFAA.
If you want to uphold 'anti-hacking laws' to go after Murdock, then you are only weakening your defense of Manning.
under the new draconian anti-hacking laws, some of which have been classified as 'terrorism', perhaps NewsCorp could be declared a terrorist organization.
im referring to the US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, some of which paragraphs now qualify under 'terrorism' and RICO law.
maybe the UK has something similar - they used terror law to go after Iceland when the banks busted.
according to some of his defenders, alot of the stuff he got was 'commonly downloaded' by people on the base, especially the Collateral Murder video.
if you search youtube for video of afghan/iraq air strikes, i'd say that seems about right.
now if there is a bradley manning, who was doing it to blow whistles, there are probably some people who are doing it for profit, selling info to others.
why they aren't up on charges like him? sometimes the military wants to flip them to become triple agents. sometimes it doesnt want the bad publicity. the people who caught aldrich ames almost got nothing, a tiny ass little party , small than what we give people for birthdays at work. who knows.
there were very few 'bison' in the desert where the Anasazi lived, or in other areas like, say, florida or new york. there was plenty of hunting, but there was also plenty of agriculture.
hence the mythology of the 'three sisters', corn, beans, and squash beans could be preserved through the winter, a task more difficult for meat (although possible)
yes i am a vegetarian. as were ancient hindus, as were ancient buddhists. some of the first 'mock meats' were invented by buddhists who were inventing new ways to process soybeans.
the elimination of modern factory farming would not necessarily result in a 'mass protein deficiency' for the immediately apparent reasons. i.e. the deficiency would probably come from people having to change their habits, and alter their tastes.
changing habits and altering tastes are something that is nearly impossible to do, and that is what would cause the deficiency, not a lack of protein.
there were a couple of protests about 10 years ago about an oil company dealing with some dictators in the western pacific, cant even remember the names.
one of the local 'professional student protestor' groups had this girl who went on a hunger strike over it.
Slashdot Mirror
the fount of a thousand 'wheres my jetpack' jokes.
had no life forms too...
and cutting 'expenses' of proper floor cleaning and bathroom cleaning....
oh fuck it.
we could have kicked unemployment down by a couple ten-thousand by hiring people to wash scrubs and keep things clean, and at the same time reduced bacteria in hospitals, which would have prevented countless infections (actually not countless, some people have done studies on this type of thing).
but no. fuck that. lets fire all the janitors and clotheswashers and invent weird new chemical experiments that probably might work maybe, because some investment banker needs to pay-off the maserati he wrecked on his last coke and whore binge.
SuperGermKiller - what it really kills is all those lazy union laborers fucking up your numbers at your hospital administration job!
this is not about buggy whips and ATMs.
this is about massive unemployment that will destabilize society and lead to mass starvation and mass homelessness. there aren't any jobs. when buggy whips went out, there were auto factories. there was Henry Ford, who decided for the hell of it to increase the pay of ALL HIS WORKERS, including janitors, by several multiples. old industries were replaced by new industries. those new industries payed better and they provided more opportunity to improve oneself educationally.
---
now, we have old industries dying, and no new industries replacing them.
any 'new industries' left are not paying better. they are paying worse. they are part time, no health care, no set schedule, no nothing. there are people who work at hospitals now who get no health insurance. thats where we are headed as a society.
there are no Henry Fords nowdays increasing workers pay. those CEOs would be fired in the modern era for 'wasting stockholder value' and sued for lowering stock price.
this is not 'just like the last time'. this time is different. really different.
im sorry, 'productive job that helps increase the wealth of the nation' returned no hits on Monster.
while you live in a fantasy land, real flesh and blood people cannot pay the rent or feed themselves with ideology.
before there could be 'garage based startups', people had to have garages. if you are homeless you cant have a garage.
nobody who controls the machines is going to just give food and housing and water to people.
example? health care. if you are a wal-mart part-time employee, and you get cancer, which something like 1/3 of people will, you have to declare bankruptcy. if you get a splinter in your foot and it gets infected, and you need time off work, you will probably get fired. and wal-mart can make a profit if you die on the job, because of something called 'dead peasant insurance'.
wal-mart, with one of the most advanced IT departments in the world, did not use this new found wealth from machine automation to improve the lives of the people. it used it to cut costs, slash benefits, destroy unions, outsource production to military dictatorships, and so forth and so on.
there are countless other examples.
if these examples keep being ignored, we will be where we were in the early 1900s in europe . . . masses of starving people who had nothing to lose, and so joined revolutionary movements to overthrow the existing governments and try bizarre social experiments that ended in horror.
if not for the crazy people who put linux ontop of a FAT filesystem (dont ask) i probably wouldnt be the successfull IT profes.. i mean .. homeless nutjob i am today.
like FoxConn, and the other Chinese laptop manufacturers.
alot of these 'american companies' are just brands. and if anything can be transferred easily to any headquarters, anywhere, it is a brand.
for example, hummer. now owned by China.
uhmm dude you just said you want someone to die for hacking into a phone. thats not really considered by most people to be an appropriate punishment for the level of crime allegedly committed
if you read through enough court cases involving the first amendment, for example the recent Thomas Drake case (google FAS.org thomas drake case files), you will find out what happens when we let the first amendment 'slide' a little against people we dislike or disagree with.
precedents used against terrorists (who i do not approve of) and oliver north (who i strongly disagree with) in first amendment cases were later applied to thomas drake.
tahts why you have to protect it no matter who is on the other end of the prosecution. because eventually the government will use any precedent to further restrict that freedom of speech.
one love, one spaceship earth.
and they all have massive portions of their corporate bodies lying outside the jurisdiction of the united states.
is called 'our times' (part of a series) from the early 1900s by some guy whose name i cant remember.
because, uhm, a couple hundred thousand people died in that one.
did anyone 'hack' and 'phones' about that 'tragedy'?
other organizations.
the head of a media company will often be involved in piddly little bullshit , like how the CEO of NBC was involved in the Conan O'Brien thing.
Bill Keller of the NYTimes was directly involved in the Wikileaks debates.
the modern organization has everything timed, measured, and decided on down to when you take a shit.
the 'one bad apple defense' has been repeatedly proven to be
1. a classic tactic of modern organizations to insulate themselves from responsibility
2. very often based on utter lies
It was used by the government to act like Abu Grahib was an accident, when it was the direct result of a wide spread policy to approve of and promote 'harsh interrogation' and get rid of the culture that respected Geneva and LOAC
It was used by the government to act like My Lai was an isolated event. In reality, the Army itself collected and documented several other incidents that were similar to My Lai, and hid them in a box on a shelf for decades until they were discovered by journalists and researchers.
It is used by bank CEOs to try to act like they had no idea what their CDO trading desks were doing. Utter nonsense. They had people screaming at them about what was happening - those people got fired because they were hurting short-term profits and presented political risks to the executives.
and on and on and on
the 'one bad apple' theory has been proven time and time again to be utter lies in the modern corporate organization.
if you go into a courtroom defending Bradley Manning or Wikileaks against Espionage Act charges, you are going to want as much pro-first-amendment precedent as you can get. and you also want as much pro-hacking precedent as you can get.
that means that you want a bunch of cases on the books where hackers and journalists did not go to jail for doing their job, and whistleblowers did not get punished.
is murdock a scumbag? hey, thats irrelevant. if murdock and/or his organization get massively punished for this, then the courts will use that precedent to justify sending people like Wikileaks to jail for even longer.
Fun fact: out of Obama's several espionage act prosecutions, several also involve the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Manning has many, many charges against him that are from the CFAA.
If you want to uphold 'anti-hacking laws' to go after Murdock, then you are only weakening your defense of Manning.
under the new draconian anti-hacking laws, some of which have been classified as 'terrorism', perhaps NewsCorp could be declared a terrorist organization.
im referring to the US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, some of which paragraphs now qualify under 'terrorism' and RICO law.
maybe the UK has something similar - they used terror law to go after Iceland when the banks busted.
if you have millions of people with security clearances,
including people who are having serious psychological or emotional problems, which were known to the commanders at the time they sent him on duty.
according to some of his defenders, alot of the stuff he got was 'commonly downloaded' by people on the base, especially the Collateral Murder video.
if you search youtube for video of afghan/iraq air strikes, i'd say that seems about right.
now if there is a bradley manning, who was doing it to blow whistles, there are probably some people who are doing it for profit, selling info to others.
why they aren't up on charges like him? sometimes the military wants to flip them to become triple agents. sometimes it doesnt want the bad publicity. the people who caught aldrich ames almost got nothing, a tiny ass little party , small than what we give people for birthdays at work. who knows.
and some other old school linuxes used to have a way to implement long filenames on top of FAT filesystems.
i wonder if they should have sued microsoft for violating their patent
the first white people did not have trains
there were very few 'bison' in the desert where the Anasazi lived, or in other areas like, say, florida or new york.
there was plenty of hunting, but there was also plenty of agriculture.
hence the mythology of the 'three sisters', corn, beans, and squash
beans could be preserved through the winter, a task more difficult for meat (although possible)
yes i am a vegetarian. as were ancient hindus, as were ancient buddhists.
some of the first 'mock meats' were invented by buddhists who were inventing new ways to process soybeans.
the elimination of modern factory farming would not necessarily result in a 'mass protein deficiency' for the
immediately apparent reasons. i.e. the deficiency would probably come from people having to change their
habits, and alter their tastes.
changing habits and altering tastes are something that is nearly impossible to do, and that is what would cause
the deficiency, not a lack of protein.
which is why nobody believes it.
there were a couple of protests about 10 years ago about an oil company dealing with some dictators in the western pacific, cant even remember the names.
one of the local 'professional student protestor' groups had this girl who went on a hunger strike over it.
there are pdfs available at the bottom of the page.