That stops being relevant when we are not talking 2 companies who each have their blackboxes who is internal development. The situation is that MS has some blackboxes, and a insane patent portofolio, VS B&N who is using open source techology. If they sign any NDLA, it means that the community will never get to know what the real problems is, and MS can keep on blackmailing firms into paying for something that is not a valid patent in the first place. To make a bit more valid example: MS: Good day sir, you and all your partners may or may not be infriging any patents we own B&N: Good day to you too sit, but what patents might I ask? We don't have anything inhouse, so let us fix them MS: Please sign this NDLA first, and then pay the fee B&N: But the portofoilo is not ours, we are merely contributing, so do you mind telling us what exact patents we and all our partners are infringing? MS: Why would I do that? I have lawyers, and you can't afford court B&N: *sighs* Its blackmail and extortion, because they refuse to disclose their patents. In "normal" cases, but companies do not want to disclose because it would mean any rival firms will get a full look at what technology they are developing, but in this case the firms are a bit more like glasshouses instead of blackboxes.
I don't watch that show. However, how do you know they don't use glue? What if I get a car that you can't use magnets on? Spikes, glue, or something else?
I guess I would use "Arson" as my excuse. I mean, they are gluing something on my car, possibly causing damage in the process, and possibly damaing the vehicle by placing it there, and even possibly making me damage my car by letting it be there. Secondly: Claim its wiretapping, since the law has not yet been strucked down.
Somebody need to attempt to live in a place where the collective transportation(busses, train, metro) is shitty. If you don't have a car, you limited to moving around 1-2 kilometers, and your also severely limited in shopping groceries. And lets not forget the real problem without a car is getting a car, because its expensive, a too old model will eat your wallet with its gas bill, and if the collective transport sucks you will have have trouble getting too review the cars you want to buy.
It is easy: You cut down to the entire companies managmants wages to lowest engineering wage, and no bonuses. That includes the stockholdes, CEOs and other "high positions". It wouldn't surprise me one bit if that would earn them a really nice surplus of cash, which again could be used to massive amounts of R&D. Of course, no corporation these days wants to sit down and do what needs to be done.
And that does not adress the argument: What happens if we build infastructure and make sure people can get the food? And what happens if we tax the rich enough to provide such a system to work? Scandinavia is already doing it, and it works. Poverty is just a "pens strike" away from being removed, if somebody bothered.
Thats only true if getting a diagnoses is a large disadvantage, and that you can use bribes to use the same means and drugs as you would have gotten from the diagnose. Its no longer like that. Now, what happen is that you get the diagnose. If you are poor, this will be a huge advantage. If you are rich, your parents will make sure you get the actual help you need. If your disease is troublesome(learning disability), the poor kid loses most of his chances of rising and aquirering IE scholarships, while the rich kid might get tutors who finds a way to directly bypass the learning disability.
However, your second argument is correct: The poor students have it worse, and might even be spoonfeed damaging medicine, or discourages from getting a proper education.
If they where scientific: 2 is the most desirable one. If nobody does that, we can never figure out how much harm the screening is causing in the first place.
Every vote to the Green Party or another one is a vote that is taken from the Democrats mostly. That means that enough votes for the green party will result in a 25, 25 50% distribution: With the republicans taking the 50% cake. Its nothing but a example of why the voting system sucks,
Your 100% correct, but you are missing a core point: Without the drugs, they will lose a really large portion of their finances, which will result in a really large portion of their revenue collapsing, which results in fewer hands and fewer gang members. Which again results in fewer people hurt. Now... what statistics do you have that backs up your claim that the drugs is a insigificant portion of their revenue?
Anti-zombie simulation is basically simulating what happen if the lower classes decide to assault the police. So its a accurate simulation in its own right, for something we don't want. Its also a simulation of what happens if things get desperate enough, lets say you have 40 cures for a lethal disease and there is 2000 infected people.
No its still not Keynesian. If I change the insert rates, I only change the insentiv to use money based on speculative markeding. Its still 100% Austrian: You still hope that the marked will come to reason and do the right thing. Under a Keynesian rule you do the central bank thing, and you build infastructure and made sure the workers get enough money to keep the economic floating at a good pace. The second thing is vital to the Keynesian aspect: Without it you have the case of "Lower taxes? Thats good for me, but still: Why should I spend money to fix the crisis?"
While its true that Keynes implies goverment regulation, for it to be called Keynesian it needs a lot more than just a few meager picks of a list. Just having a central bank of sorts, or anything is not good enough for it to qualiy, it needs to do a lot more than that to qualify.
To all 3 of you: SIP is not a replacement for Skypes protocol. Its too troublesome to use, it lacks P2P video, and important features such as firewall breaching under NAT. SIP still lacks good client and lacks too many features. Anybody who thinks SIP is a replacement forgets what Skype is, and has also most likely never tested many of the features. And even if we manage to get a decent SIPish protocol that is miles better, intigrate it with a godly FLOSS client, and fix most of the issues: How will I get all the contacts I care about to migrate? Getting the normal people I know to migrate is impossible, but I don't care for them, I care about the bit more technical users on my skype list.
Well, correct me if I am wrong, but there has never been a Keynesian economy in the US except during the end of the great depression. The inflation of money into researching space programs and nuclear weapons was never distributed in such a way that it can be counted as a Keynesian model.
Ok, then here is the simple and easy question: How you stop either of the 2 big parties from getting Ca 50% of the cotes? Most of the people in the goverment stays in the goverment because the amount of seats barely changes. Protip; Unless there is a political reform, you CAN'T change those seats, because nobody in poltics is accountable, and nobody of the people voting has a memory lasting longer than half a year.
In a free marked the "company" will blackmail and exthort its costumers to avoid something like that happening. In a free marked under strict goverment control, something like what you suggest might happen, if the court system works.
Slashdot Mirror
That stops being relevant when we are not talking 2 companies who each have their blackboxes who is internal development.
The situation is that MS has some blackboxes, and a insane patent portofolio, VS B&N who is using open source techology. If they sign any NDLA, it means that the community will never get to know what the real problems is, and MS can keep on blackmailing firms into paying for something that is not a valid patent in the first place.
To make a bit more valid example:
MS: Good day sir, you and all your partners may or may not be infriging any patents we own
B&N: Good day to you too sit, but what patents might I ask? We don't have anything inhouse, so let us fix them
MS: Please sign this NDLA first, and then pay the fee
B&N: But the portofoilo is not ours, we are merely contributing, so do you mind telling us what exact patents we and all our partners are infringing?
MS: Why would I do that? I have lawyers, and you can't afford court
B&N: *sighs*
Its blackmail and extortion, because they refuse to disclose their patents. In "normal" cases, but companies do not want to disclose because it would mean any rival firms will get a full look at what technology they are developing, but in this case the firms are a bit more like glasshouses instead of blackboxes.
I don't watch that show.
However, how do you know they don't use glue? What if I get a car that you can't use magnets on? Spikes, glue, or something else?
They don't have a warrant, so... nope.
Me hirering another car would have the same effect.
How do you know that if there is no standard, and nobody has to approve that?
I guess I would use "Arson" as my excuse.
I mean, they are gluing something on my car, possibly causing damage in the process, and possibly damaing the vehicle by placing it there, and even possibly making me damage my car by letting it be there.
Secondly: Claim its wiretapping, since the law has not yet been strucked down.
Somebody need to attempt to live in a place where the collective transportation(busses, train, metro) is shitty.
If you don't have a car, you limited to moving around 1-2 kilometers, and your also severely limited in shopping groceries. And lets not forget the real problem without a car is getting a car, because its expensive, a too old model will eat your wallet with its gas bill, and if the collective transport sucks you will have have trouble getting too review the cars you want to buy.
It is easy: You cut down to the entire companies managmants wages to lowest engineering wage, and no bonuses. That includes the stockholdes, CEOs and other "high positions".
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if that would earn them a really nice surplus of cash, which again could be used to massive amounts of R&D.
Of course, no corporation these days wants to sit down and do what needs to be done.
And that does not adress the argument:
What happens if we build infastructure and make sure people can get the food? And what happens if we tax the rich enough to provide such a system to work?
Scandinavia is already doing it, and it works. Poverty is just a "pens strike" away from being removed, if somebody bothered.
Thats only true if getting a diagnoses is a large disadvantage, and that you can use bribes to use the same means and drugs as you would have gotten from the diagnose. Its no longer like that.
Now, what happen is that you get the diagnose. If you are poor, this will be a huge advantage. If you are rich, your parents will make sure you get the actual help you need.
If your disease is troublesome(learning disability), the poor kid loses most of his chances of rising and aquirering IE scholarships, while the rich kid might get tutors who finds a way to directly bypass the learning disability.
However, your second argument is correct: The poor students have it worse, and might even be spoonfeed damaging medicine, or discourages from getting a proper education.
That requires blackmailing. Otherwise they have no reason to budge.
So my anon: How do you propose we blackmail them?
If they where scientific: 2 is the most desirable one.
If nobody does that, we can never figure out how much harm the screening is causing in the first place.
Coffine is one of the most addicted substances known to man.
Could the food industri please stop selling addictive drugs to people? Its really annoying to watch.
Every vote to the Green Party or another one is a vote that is taken from the Democrats mostly. That means that enough votes for the green party will result in a 25, 25 50% distribution: With the republicans taking the 50% cake.
Its nothing but a example of why the voting system sucks,
So how did you get a job? That is the problem and the cause.
Your 100% correct, but you are missing a core point:
Without the drugs, they will lose a really large portion of their finances, which will result in a really large portion of their revenue collapsing, which results in fewer hands and fewer gang members. Which again results in fewer people hurt.
Now... what statistics do you have that backs up your claim that the drugs is a insigificant portion of their revenue?
Anti-zombie simulation is basically simulating what happen if the lower classes decide to assault the police. So its a accurate simulation in its own right, for something we don't want.
Its also a simulation of what happens if things get desperate enough, lets say you have 40 cures for a lethal disease and there is 2000 infected people.
No its still not Keynesian.
If I change the insert rates, I only change the insentiv to use money based on speculative markeding. Its still 100% Austrian: You still hope that the marked will come to reason and do the right thing.
Under a Keynesian rule you do the central bank thing, and you build infastructure and made sure the workers get enough money to keep the economic floating at a good pace. The second thing is vital to the Keynesian aspect: Without it you have the case of "Lower taxes? Thats good for me, but still: Why should I spend money to fix the crisis?"
While its true that Keynes implies goverment regulation, for it to be called Keynesian it needs a lot more than just a few meager picks of a list. Just having a central bank of sorts, or anything is not good enough for it to qualiy, it needs to do a lot more than that to qualify.
To all 3 of you: SIP is not a replacement for Skypes protocol.
Its too troublesome to use, it lacks P2P video, and important features such as firewall breaching under NAT.
SIP still lacks good client and lacks too many features. Anybody who thinks SIP is a replacement forgets what Skype is, and has also most likely never tested many of the features.
And even if we manage to get a decent SIPish protocol that is miles better, intigrate it with a godly FLOSS client, and fix most of the issues: How will I get all the contacts I care about to migrate? Getting the normal people I know to migrate is impossible, but I don't care for them, I care about the bit more technical users on my skype list.
Well, correct me if I am wrong, but there has never been a Keynesian economy in the US except during the end of the great depression.
The inflation of money into researching space programs and nuclear weapons was never distributed in such a way that it can be counted as a Keynesian model.
Ok, then here is the simple and easy question: How you stop either of the 2 big parties from getting Ca 50% of the cotes?
Most of the people in the goverment stays in the goverment because the amount of seats barely changes.
Protip; Unless there is a political reform, you CAN'T change those seats, because nobody in poltics is accountable, and nobody of the people voting has a memory lasting longer than half a year.
In a free marked the "company" will blackmail and exthort its costumers to avoid something like that happening.
In a free marked under strict goverment control, something like what you suggest might happen, if the court system works.
Because by the time you have tracked down the person harming you, its too late, the damage has already been done.
Killing him won't change that.
I could have agreed with you if there was not for the fact that there is a severe amount of unemployment.