Speaking of monitors. Apple store is charging $1299 for the 20" monitor, but only $1899 for the iMac with the 20" monitor. Does that make sense to anyone?
Can I skip the monitor and get a G5 for $600, please?
Here's a question. IBM seems to be willing to go to the mat to defend open source and/or free software. Does this buy loyalty from you linux developers? Do you think they are getting more "good will" than they are spending in lawyers fees?
Given the rabid right-wing politics of most of the people in the defence and intelligence communities, I'm not surprised that a prominant "lefty" like Ted Kennedy was targeted It was probably some mouth-breathing contractor at the TSA's idea of a joke.
If a prorietary software vendor wants to package MySQL with their product I'm glad MySQL AG is getting a few bucks out of it.
It doesn't seem to negatively affect the free software developers.
I've always liked the idea that you could release a product under a Free license but keep the option to sell versions to companies as well.
I realize that this doesn't answer the question of whether the GPL itself allows this kind of dual license but it seems to me that TrollTech does something similar and that has never bothered me either.
His kids might barely be able to phonetically sound out the words to "Curious George" and they are still going to be worth $N,000,000,000 more than you or me where N is some integer value greater than one. At this point in time or any point in time in the foreseeable future.
I notice that in your response you also convienently skipped over: connections, real estate, and all the other benefits starting out rich provide. It is a popular mythology of this country that we all start out equal, and I still firmly believe that we as individuals have more opportunities in this country than just about any other country on this planet. But, to claim that wealth gives you no advantages in the race to gather more wealth is naive to the point of willful ignorance.
I agree. The story of Warren Buffett starting out with nothing but a shovel and a can of beans in 1997 and becoming the mutli-billionaire he is today is an inspiration to us all. And look how far the Rothchildes, the Rockefellers, and the Mellon-Scaifes have fallen. All of their money, connections, family estates, investments, and education couldn't hold their place among the wealthy.
I'm a good example of this sort of class mobility. I get paid on the 15th of the month, but I don't pay rent until the 30th. That means that there are at least 2 weeks where I probably rise from 30% to the 32% (or even higher) in the ranking of the wealthy!
It's probably safer to just assume that everyone is a criminal or terrorist. There could be some process to remove the tax for those that have proven themselves innocent (perhaps by a secret tribunal or something...)
Your powerful message shook the cynicism from my eyes. (cue patriotic music...)
No longer will I assume that lobbiests funnel money to our representatives to buy influence. I now realize that they simply want to be friendly.
No longer shall I think negative thoughts when Dick C. invites energy companies into private meetings to write energy bills. They were probably just playing Risk or Dungeons & Dragons.
No longer will I assume that George was skipping National Guard duty in Texas rather than slogging through the jungles of Vietnam because of his family connections. It was probably just the luck of the draw.
I will recognize that the DMCA was for the benefit of all citizens of our great country and not a cynical manuever to extend Mickey Mouse's value. I feel better knowing that my copyrights are now protected for decades after I die.
I will rejoice that the grassroots efforts of the voters of California managed to unseat a lawfully elected govenor without the influence of outside money. Jeb next, anyone?
From now on the great words of the commie freak Arlo will echo in my ears: "This Land is YOUR Land; This Land if MY Land!" Assuming, of course, that this is considered "fair use" under the current law.
In purely economic terms, the wealthy elements of society have the most to lose from social disruption. In every government program (especially defense, transportation, and any form of research) those that gain the most from government expenditures are those with the most invested in the system. Those benefits either come directly (defense contract pay pretty damn well) or indirectly (I don't need to hire a security firm to protect my apartment and my nice computers because we all pay a little for a police department).
GPP is correct. A progressive tax is fairer because those that can pay more most defintely gain more from the system. You are right; "taxes are not a way to 'keep society stable'", but what you are missing is that the services those taxes provide ARE what help keep society stable.
I'd be willing to posture that even those "pure" welfare payments (in the old sense of the word as opposed to corporate subsidies which definitely benefit the wealthy overwhelmingly) like medicaid help keep society stable becuase they are a symbol of a level of compassion towards the weakest members of society.
BTW, neither of your two examples are technically taxes. We pay social security to pay for the previous generation's retirement. Presumably, our kids will pay for social security to pay for our retirement. I'm less certain about medicare but I think it works similarly.
Large monies gained from endorsements and sometimes awards in excess of $1 million for a gold medal. Michael Phelps (USA swimming) is looking for quite a chunk *IF* (big IF) he sets the gold metal count record. You may not have any but everyone else sure does.
I'm not sure of your point. Drugs (and gene therapy) used to enhance athletic ability are bad because Nike has an advertising contract with an athlete?
Why should they be ashamed? It's their bodies. It's not like I have any money riding on the outcome. It's not like being a gold medal calibre athlete is generally "healthy" in the "well-rounded live to 97 with all your joints intact" sense of the word.
Actually, I'm playing devil's advocate here, since I do think there is a loss of purity to the games, but I thought that ever since the "Dream Team" jumped in the game and started beating up on the true amatures. I guess I'm just a little fed up with the media frenzy (currently drugs but gene therapy is just around the corner) with the assumtion that it is WRONG without anyone asked to defend their position.
I never said anything about lowering the speed limits. They are what they are and most people ignore them. What's your point?
Any car that allows a commute to go from 4 hours to 30 minutes must be on loan from the MiB. I guess what you actually meant to say is that your fancy car (no matter how much tailgating and lane changes you attempt) gets you to work 30 seconds faster than a Kia, or it would if it weren't for all the other cars blocking traffic. In other words, every rush hour everyone in their $80k Mercades and everyone in their $11k Kia are going exactly the same speed. Good investment there...
"Less a passenger in life, more a driver" ??? Do people pay you to come up with lines like that or is it just a hobby?
I guess if the speed limits are all all 35 to 65 there's no need to buy that Beemer or Benz. Wow, you just saved yourself tens of thousands of dollars.
Oh, I forgot, your sense of self-worth is tied up in the type of car you drive.
I'm willing to bet that not one of those people is going under the speed limit. They may be going slower than you want them to go, but, in that case, its your problem not their's.
Are you trying to imply that someone in the left lane going 75 in the left lane will get pulled over for blocking the asshat trying to go 85?
Anyway, FYI, I travel generally 5 - 15 mpg over the speed limit which seems to be about prevailing speed (and why I posted my comment in the first place) and I and try to stay as far right as possible. I've found that I'll ofter try to merge right after given the car I'm passing a little space and some dickless wonder will veer into the right lane to pass.
Well, it looks like neither of us would choose to live in a McMansion. I am still willing to bet that a "well-engineered" house can be designed to withstand storms AND mitigate the heat that is absorbed by the house (through the use of overhands, porches, etc..).
With all due respect, how many "good" drivers do you see on the road on a daily basis. When was the last time you saw a vehical go the speed limit (not 5 to 10 mph over, but the actual posted speed limit?)
Okay, I do it occassionally just to piss-off tailgaters...
Anyway, IMOSFHO, the real danger on the road is people who pass on the right, tailgaters, people who don't use turn signals, and people who generally act like asshats. Speed is just a multiplier for other stupid behavior. When are we going to get the black box that detects assholes?
Wow, you mean build and design for the climate and terrain that you inhabit? What a unique concept.
In other words, no stucco or adobe in Seattle (it worries me to see the mold and algea covering the walls of some of the houses there). No grass lawns in Nevada. No flat roofs in the Rockies.
It's depressing to see the exact same style of McMansion in Seattle, D.C., Miami, and Tuscon. Are the developers simply lacking any imagination or is it the buyers that don't have a clue?
Anyway, I think you overstate the problem with overhangs. I'd rather weather a hurricane in my friend's 1880 house -- with large overhanging porch and all sorts of Victorian gingerbread; it survived Isabelle (a weak hurricane, I'll admit) with a single broken shutter -- than a modern McMansion. You can get away with a lot when you have the resources and craftsmanship available to build things strong. However, this is Maryland with relatively infrequent, and generally weak, storms.
In Florida, I think you could still design with thick walls and recessed windows. You'd save money on your AC for seven months out of the year in exchange for having to spend a little more on your design.
I kinda figured that they were referring to a "free microbrews on a Friday afternoon policy" (a la Microsoft) not a "lets keep the fridge stocked with schlitz policy" (a la IBM).
Different strokes for different folks. I can't think of a better perk than beer for two reasons.
1. Its beer... 2. If my employer is handing me a beer it means that the work day is complete and there is no expectation that I'm going to go back to work and do anything more productive than surf the web. Recognition that the day is complete is one of the best perks there is.
Slashdot Mirror
Speaking of monitors. Apple store is charging $1299 for the 20" monitor, but only $1899 for the iMac with the 20" monitor. Does that make sense to anyone?
Can I skip the monitor and get a G5 for $600, please?
Here's a question. IBM seems to be willing to go to the mat to defend open source and/or free software. Does this buy loyalty from you linux developers? Do you think they are getting more "good will" than they are spending in lawyers fees?
Given the rabid right-wing politics of most of the people in the defence and intelligence communities, I'm not surprised that a prominant "lefty" like Ted Kennedy was targeted It was probably some mouth-breathing contractor at the TSA's idea of a joke.
If a prorietary software vendor wants to package MySQL with their product I'm glad MySQL AG is getting a few bucks out of it.
It doesn't seem to negatively affect the free software developers.
I've always liked the idea that you could release a product under a Free license but keep the option to sell versions to companies as well.
I realize that this doesn't answer the question of whether the GPL itself allows this kind of dual license but it seems to me that TrollTech does something similar and that has never bothered me either.
His kids might barely be able to phonetically sound out the words to "Curious George" and they are still going to be worth $N,000,000,000 more than you or me where N is some integer value greater than one. At this point in time or any point in time in the foreseeable future.
I notice that in your response you also convienently skipped over: connections, real estate, and all the other benefits starting out rich provide. It is a popular mythology of this country that we all start out equal, and I still firmly believe that we as individuals have more opportunities in this country than just about any other country on this planet. But, to claim that wealth gives you no advantages in the race to gather more wealth is naive to the point of willful ignorance.
I agree. The story of Warren Buffett starting out with nothing but a shovel and a can of beans in 1997 and becoming the mutli-billionaire he is today is an inspiration to us all. And look how far the Rothchildes, the Rockefellers, and the Mellon-Scaifes have fallen. All of their money, connections, family estates, investments, and education couldn't hold their place among the wealthy.
I'm a good example of this sort of class mobility. I get paid on the 15th of the month, but I don't pay rent until the 30th. That means that there are at least 2 weeks where I probably rise from 30% to the 32% (or even higher) in the ranking of the wealthy!
It's probably safer to just assume that everyone is a criminal or terrorist. There could be some process to remove the tax for those that have proven themselves innocent (perhaps by a secret tribunal or something...)
Your powerful message shook the cynicism from my eyes. (cue patriotic music...)
No longer will I assume that lobbiests funnel money to our representatives to buy influence. I now realize that they simply want to be friendly.
No longer shall I think negative thoughts when Dick C. invites energy companies into private meetings to write energy bills. They were probably just playing Risk or Dungeons & Dragons.
No longer will I assume that George was skipping National Guard duty in Texas rather than slogging through the jungles of Vietnam because of his family connections. It was probably just the luck of the draw.
I will recognize that the DMCA was for the benefit of all citizens of our great country and not a cynical manuever to extend Mickey Mouse's value. I feel better knowing that my copyrights are now protected for decades after I die.
I will rejoice that the grassroots efforts of the voters of California managed to unseat a lawfully elected govenor without the influence of outside money. Jeb next, anyone?
From now on the great words of the commie freak Arlo will echo in my ears: "This Land is YOUR Land; This Land if MY Land!" Assuming, of course, that this is considered "fair use" under the current law.
In purely economic terms, the wealthy elements of society have the most to lose from social disruption. In every government program (especially defense, transportation, and any form of research) those that gain the most from government expenditures are those with the most invested in the system. Those benefits either come directly (defense contract pay pretty damn well) or indirectly (I don't need to hire a security firm to protect my apartment and my nice computers because we all pay a little for a police department).
GPP is correct. A progressive tax is fairer because those that can pay more most defintely gain more from the system. You are right; "taxes are not a way to 'keep society stable'", but what you are missing is that the services those taxes provide ARE what help keep society stable.
I'd be willing to posture that even those "pure" welfare payments (in the old sense of the word as opposed to corporate subsidies which definitely benefit the wealthy overwhelmingly) like medicaid help keep society stable becuase they are a symbol of a level of compassion towards the weakest members of society.
BTW, neither of your two examples are technically taxes. We pay social security to pay for the previous generation's retirement. Presumably, our kids will pay for social security to pay for our retirement. I'm less certain about medicare but I think it works similarly.
Large monies gained from endorsements and sometimes awards in excess of $1 million for a gold medal. Michael Phelps (USA swimming) is looking for quite a chunk *IF* (big IF) he sets the gold metal count record. You may not have any but everyone else sure does.
I'm not sure of your point. Drugs (and gene therapy) used to enhance athletic ability are bad because Nike has an advertising contract with an athlete?
Why should they be ashamed? It's their bodies. It's not like I have any money riding on the outcome. It's not like being a gold medal calibre athlete is generally "healthy" in the "well-rounded live to 97 with all your joints intact" sense of the word.
Actually, I'm playing devil's advocate here, since I do think there is a loss of purity to the games, but I thought that ever since the "Dream Team" jumped in the game and started beating up on the true amatures. I guess I'm just a little fed up with the media frenzy (currently drugs but gene therapy is just around the corner) with the assumtion that it is WRONG without anyone asked to defend their position.
From the Financial Desk...
Dateline 2004.08.12...
Shares of the popular slacker/hacker website Slashdot fell 97% this morning on news that gene therapy can cure procrastination.
(c) 2004 Reuters
Whatever happened to that site the O'Reilly and Bezos (I think?) started after the "one-click" fiasco.
Whasn't that site supposed to track down prior art?
I think BountyQuest was the name...
I tried navigating to it this morning but got an unresolved URL error.
Thats why JPEG stands for "Joint PHOTOGRAPHERS Expert Group" (or something close to that).
JPEG is for photographs as the parent expressed.
I never said anything about lowering the speed limits. They are what they are and most people ignore them. What's your point?
Any car that allows a commute to go from 4 hours to 30 minutes must be on loan from the MiB. I guess what you actually meant to say is that your fancy car (no matter how much tailgating and lane changes you attempt) gets you to work 30 seconds faster than a Kia, or it would if it weren't for all the other cars blocking traffic. In other words, every rush hour everyone in their $80k Mercades and everyone in their $11k Kia are going exactly the same speed. Good investment there...
"Less a passenger in life, more a driver" ??? Do people pay you to come up with lines like that or is it just a hobby?
I guess if the speed limits are all all 35 to 65 there's no need to buy that Beemer or Benz. Wow, you just saved yourself tens of thousands of dollars.
Oh, I forgot, your sense of self-worth is tied up in the type of car you drive.
I'm willing to bet that not one of those people is going under the speed limit. They may be going slower than you want them to go, but, in that case, its your problem not their's.
Are you trying to imply that someone in the left lane going 75 in the left lane will get pulled over for blocking the asshat trying to go 85?
Anyway, FYI, I travel generally 5 - 15 mpg over the speed limit which seems to be about prevailing speed (and why I posted my comment in the first place) and I and try to stay as far right as possible. I've found that I'll ofter try to merge right after given the car I'm passing a little space and some dickless wonder will veer into the right lane to pass.
Well, it looks like neither of us would choose to live in a McMansion. I am still willing to bet that a "well-engineered" house can be designed to withstand storms AND mitigate the heat that is absorbed by the house (through the use of overhands, porches, etc..).
With all due respect, how many "good" drivers do you see on the road on a daily basis. When was the last time you saw a vehical go the speed limit (not 5 to 10 mph over, but the actual posted speed limit?)
Okay, I do it occassionally just to piss-off tailgaters...
Anyway, IMOSFHO, the real danger on the road is people who pass on the right, tailgaters, people who don't use turn signals, and people who generally act like asshats. Speed is just a multiplier for other stupid behavior. When are we going to get the black box that detects assholes?
Wow, you mean build and design for the climate and terrain that you inhabit? What a unique concept.
In other words, no stucco or adobe in Seattle (it worries me to see the mold and algea covering the walls of some of the houses there). No grass lawns in Nevada. No flat roofs in the Rockies.
It's depressing to see the exact same style of McMansion in Seattle, D.C., Miami, and Tuscon. Are the developers simply lacking any imagination or is it the buyers that don't have a clue?
Anyway, I think you overstate the problem with overhangs. I'd rather weather a hurricane in my friend's 1880 house -- with large overhanging porch and all sorts of Victorian gingerbread; it survived Isabelle (a weak hurricane, I'll admit) with a single broken shutter -- than a modern McMansion. You can get away with a lot when you have the resources and craftsmanship available to build things strong. However, this is Maryland with relatively infrequent, and generally weak, storms.
In Florida, I think you could still design with thick walls and recessed windows. You'd save money on your AC for seven months out of the year in exchange for having to spend a little more on your design.
How do you think Twinkies get their yellow tint?
Of course I realize that doesn't answer the toxicity question...
I kinda figured that they were referring to a "free microbrews on a Friday afternoon policy" (a la Microsoft) not a "lets keep the fridge stocked with schlitz policy" (a la IBM).
;-)
Just kidding about IBM...
Different strokes for different folks. I can't think of a better perk than beer for two reasons.
1. Its beer...
2. If my employer is handing me a beer it means that the work day is complete and there is no expectation that I'm going to go back to work and do anything more productive than surf the web. Recognition that the day is complete is one of the best perks there is.
It's a shame you posted anonymously. Stand up for a better tomorrow. Let the Bushies mod you down, you are still right.
I wish I had Karma points. I love my Jetta TDI! I get 54 MPG in mostly highway driving. That pushes it up to second on the list behind the Insight.