So we always have just the two offerings, who have, mysteriously, the same price, though they use completely different infrastructures. Just like TV happens to cost the same whether delivered by cables that were paid off by the early 90s, or satellites 40,000km overhead. What are the odds such different technologies would cost exactly the same to the consumer?
You betray an utter lack of understanding of economics in general and business in particular.
The price is not a function of costs, as you mistakenly believe, but of the balance between supply and demand.
During the last year's standoff, the Troika dangled a carrot of 20% write-off - it failed to materialize
You are lying by omission here. The write-off was discussed BEFORE your favorite cretinous clowns Tsipras and Varoufakis tried their criminal bluff. After the EU called their bluff, there was no reason to treat them with any respect.
Greece imposed austerity on the level that has not been seen in a peacetime in Europe.
Now you are straight out lying, as the obvious examples of Romania in the 80s, former USSR in the 90s are much, much worse examples of imposed austerity in Europe.
EU has shown that if your government makes a mistake (or even if it doesn't - see "Spain") and you fall on hard times, then instead of getting help you will be beaten into a pulp and left to be picked up by vultures.
So you claim that receiving HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of Euros is somehow being "beaten to a pulp and left to be picked up by vultures"?????
Let me guess: you were no the brightest between your Bolshevik friends...
By insisting on Greece paying debts at a rate that is insurmountable and not providing any form of relief. Had Greece been out of the EU, they could have devalued their currency and/or defaulted on their debts. After a couple of years of turmoil they could have achieved sustainable growth. I suggest reading: https://yanisvaroufakis.eu/ [yanisvaroufakis.eu] if you care about it.
Taking advice from Varoufakis about finance and/or Greece is like taking advice from Hitler about Jews and/or peace.
The wanted to parallelize some off-work activities of their employees. Seems like Soviet Union style of meddling in comrades' private life led to similar type of money destruction.
I'm an economist; I recently finished my PhD and am now working in the tech industry.
So was Varoufakis, the former finance minister of Greece (aka the imbecile clown with cretinous ideas). In other words, what you seem to believe it's a position that gives authority in the topic is actually the same qualification as one of the finest examples of being a stupefying imbecile.
I am hugely in favor of UBI.
You just disgraced yourself saying that. UBI is another version of Soviet system. It can't work on the long term. It can work on short term only of the system is autonomous (better fully separated) from the world economy and population pool.
Your whole text reinforces the disdain of Central and Eastern Europeans against selfish Western Europeans.
"For you, "socialist" is a nasty word. For me, here in Europe, we have had a socialist party in our government for the better parts of the latter 20 century, and we have reached a prosperity level that most of the world, and I dare say including the US, envy us for. So someone calling himself "socialist" isn't that big a deal here."
In Central and Eastern European members of the EU the reality is that "Socialist" is being seen as a more tricky version of "Communist" (which in itself is seen as nothing different than "Nazi"). Yes, the Socialists themselves tend to believe being a Socialist is oh-so-different than being a Communist (with a minority being actually hardcore Communists who realize their only way to influence is by using the Socialist umbrella). But since most Socialist parties are in reality former Communist ones (you know, those who enslaved their own nations post WW2), their situation is very similar to those who are sorry for being caught, not sorry for doing something bad. For the majority of the population Socialism has negative connotations (for obvious reasons).
"He would, by the way, be the absolute polar opposite of a "liberal" for the average European."
True. A liberal in Europe still follows the classical liberalism stance of freedom.
"Also due to our political history, where the liberals are usually found at the right edge of the political spectrum."
Not true. And it shows that you're a socialist / social-democrat / leftist yourself (not that there were much remaining doubts by now). European liberals are on the CENTRE-RIGHT of the political spectrum. On the RIGHT-EDGE are, well, right-wing / nationalist / populist movements and parties. But as usual European leftists believe they are the center, so of course a liberal would be so far to the right...
"A "conservative" here is more a centrist than a right wing nutjob."
I fail to see where on this discussion (which is focusing exclusively on either USA or the European Union) conservatives are *EVER* believed to be "right wing nutjobs". The only place would be some Communist propaganda outlets... So now we know even better your position, comrade "Opportunist"!
"If you're looking for poisoned words in the political arena here, I guess you have to reach for "nationalist". That well has been utterly poisoned for good, I think. But I guess that's what starting the bloodiest war in the history of mankind would do."
Funny thing is that WW2 was started by National-SOCIALIST Germany and COMMUNIST Russia attacking and sharing Poland. So let's tone down the obvious lies that the bloodiest war in history was not the direct effect of left wing nutjobs bringing socialist / communist revolution to the unprepared world.
Of course you should be held liable. By your own admission you knew of the problem and didn't fix it. End of story.
Just for you to understand: a safe harbor situation happens only the the Internet access provider takes place to track access: either individual logins + passwords or tracking activity and storing the logs for N years. Absent such measures the access provider is liable for actions originating from his/her access point.
CEO's primary job is increasing share value. So why aren't they all just paid minimum wage, plus a bonus proportional to how much they increase shareholder value buy? Stock goes down, they eat beans and wieners for dinner.
Maybe it's like that because of this little known thing called the law of supply and demand: the supply of wanna-be CEOs is a function of the benefits offered by the companies in need of CEOs.
Amazing. One would think that a family with that sort of wealth at their disposal might be able to hire all sorts of nannies/governesses/tutors at any hour of the month to keep their kids occupied (and educated) while they slept in - whether on a weekend or on any other day of the week.
Cudos for keeping it real and staying in touch with how the other half ^H^H^H^H 99.9999% lives.
Amazing. One would think that an intelligent, educated reader of Slashdot might be able to understand that this is a highly "massaged" version of the real story, which Melinda Gates' PR department disseminates to the 99%.
Cudos for keeping your innocence and believing everything on the "Kardashians" TV shows.
I think Americans' (rightful) pride in the First Amendment has blinded many to the fact that legislators have basically stopped paying attention to the whole area of speech, and so there's a huge amount we'll-know-it-when-we-see-it arbitrary case law around things like free vs. criminal speech, what speech acts are protected from civil liability, etc.
You seem utterly uninformed on the topic you're publicly commenting. Free speech means the GOVERNMENT can't decide on behalf of the citizens what they can or can't say.
As Twitter is not part of the government, any reference to free speech is idiotic.
By avoiding government systems Clinton potentially put lives, diplomatic relations, and US secrets at risk.
The emails in question were believed to not contain classified info
That's simply not true (and I'm surprised you could believe Clinton's utterly false claims). As per State department rules, anything related to foreign countries is classified by default, without any need for such marking.
If it had anything at all to do with rape, the Swedish government would have taken Assange up on his offer to return to the country if they promised
Assange had no legal right to bargain with the Swedish authorities; the Swedish legal system precludes the prosecutors from striking the kind of deals Assange proposed. Assange obviously knew that - his whole act was for dramatic effect, not for any tangible benefit.
things like rounding up and killing minorities which is the sort of thing we fought a war against people such as Goebbels to stop
Let's not get carried away by self-righteous rhetoric. No country fought war on Germany because of Germany's inhuman treatment on its minorities.
The fight against Germany had been caused either by being directly attacked by Germany (the case of Poland, USSR), being declared war by Germany (the case of the USA), or being mandated by existing alliances to go to war against Germany (the case of France or UK).
First of all, a company doing business in a country must respect and obey the laws of said country. That goes without even saying, moron. Apple has registered subsidiaries in China, nevermind their huge manufacturing sourcing business in mainland.
As for "gradually been bringing its manufacturing back home" this means you are too stupid to cross the street. No consumer IT / electronics company in the US, Apple included, can bring manufacturing back to the US. The ecosystem for the electronics is simply not available in the US anymore. Apple made some noise about that http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingleton/2013/11/03/reports-of-americas-manufacturing-renaissance-are-just-a-cruel-hoax/ but it's *NOISE*, nothing more.
At the time there were limited arms (you took about 2 minutes to reload) vs able to empty a couple clips in that same amount of time, now.
At the time the press was literally a mechanical device that took between 1 to 3 hours to print the first sheet of paper (I'm counting from before having the letters put in place).
Based on your cretinous logic, freedom of the press today should be limited to the technological limits 200 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
So we always have just the two offerings, who have, mysteriously, the same price, though they use completely different infrastructures. Just like TV happens to cost the same whether delivered by cables that were paid off by the early 90s, or satellites 40,000km overhead. What are the odds such different technologies would cost exactly the same to the consumer?
You betray an utter lack of understanding of economics in general and business in particular.
The price is not a function of costs, as you mistakenly believe, but of the balance between supply and demand.
Aren't you tired to rehash old Chomsky bullshit that was d too many debunked too many times to count?
Just wondering.
During the last year's standoff, the Troika dangled a carrot of 20% write-off - it failed to materialize
You are lying by omission here. The write-off was discussed BEFORE your favorite cretinous clowns Tsipras and Varoufakis tried their criminal bluff. After the EU called their bluff, there was no reason to treat them with any respect.
Greece imposed austerity on the level that has not been seen in a peacetime in Europe.
Now you are straight out lying, as the obvious examples of Romania in the 80s, former USSR in the 90s are much, much worse examples of imposed austerity in Europe.
EU has shown that if your government makes a mistake (or even if it doesn't - see "Spain") and you fall on hard times, then instead of getting help you will be beaten into a pulp and left to be picked up by vultures.
So you claim that receiving HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of Euros is somehow being "beaten to a pulp and left to be picked up by vultures"?????
Let me guess: you were no the brightest between your Bolshevik friends...
By insisting on Greece paying debts at a rate that is insurmountable and not providing any form of relief. Had Greece been out of the EU, they could have devalued their currency and/or defaulted on their debts. After a couple of years of turmoil they could have achieved sustainable growth. I suggest reading: https://yanisvaroufakis.eu/ [yanisvaroufakis.eu] if you care about it.
Taking advice from Varoufakis about finance and/or Greece is like taking advice from Hitler about Jews and/or peace.
Interesting mix of racism and paranoia.
The wanted to parallelize some off-work activities of their employees. Seems like Soviet Union style of meddling in comrades' private life led to similar type of money destruction.
Washing clothes while the employee is at the company gym.
I'm an economist; I recently finished my PhD and am now working in the tech industry.
So was Varoufakis, the former finance minister of Greece (aka the imbecile clown with cretinous ideas). In other words, what you seem to believe it's a position that gives authority in the topic is actually the same qualification as one of the finest examples of being a stupefying imbecile.
I am hugely in favor of UBI.
You just disgraced yourself saying that. UBI is another version of Soviet system. It can't work on the long term. It can work on short term only of the system is autonomous (better fully separated) from the world economy and population pool.
Your whole text reinforces the disdain of Central and Eastern Europeans against selfish Western Europeans.
"For you, "socialist" is a nasty word. For me, here in Europe, we have had a socialist party in our government for the better parts of the latter 20 century, and we have reached a prosperity level that most of the world, and I dare say including the US, envy us for. So someone calling himself "socialist" isn't that big a deal here."
In Central and Eastern European members of the EU the reality is that "Socialist" is being seen as a more tricky version of "Communist" (which in itself is seen as nothing different than "Nazi"). Yes, the Socialists themselves tend to believe being a Socialist is oh-so-different than being a Communist (with a minority being actually hardcore Communists who realize their only way to influence is by using the Socialist umbrella). But since most Socialist parties are in reality former Communist ones (you know, those who enslaved their own nations post WW2), their situation is very similar to those who are sorry for being caught, not sorry for doing something bad. For the majority of the population Socialism has negative connotations (for obvious reasons).
"He would, by the way, be the absolute polar opposite of a "liberal" for the average European."
True. A liberal in Europe still follows the classical liberalism stance of freedom.
"Also due to our political history, where the liberals are usually found at the right edge of the political spectrum."
Not true. And it shows that you're a socialist / social-democrat / leftist yourself (not that there were much remaining doubts by now). European liberals are on the CENTRE-RIGHT of the political spectrum. On the RIGHT-EDGE are, well, right-wing / nationalist / populist movements and parties. But as usual European leftists believe they are the center, so of course a liberal would be so far to the right...
"A "conservative" here is more a centrist than a right wing nutjob."
I fail to see where on this discussion (which is focusing exclusively on either USA or the European Union) conservatives are *EVER* believed to be "right wing nutjobs". The only place would be some Communist propaganda outlets... So now we know even better your position, comrade "Opportunist"!
"If you're looking for poisoned words in the political arena here, I guess you have to reach for "nationalist". That well has been utterly poisoned for good, I think. But I guess that's what starting the bloodiest war in the history of mankind would do."
Funny thing is that WW2 was started by National-SOCIALIST Germany and COMMUNIST Russia attacking and sharing Poland. So let's tone down the obvious lies that the bloodiest war in history was not the direct effect of left wing nutjobs bringing socialist / communist revolution to the unprepared world.
Should I be liable for /all/ of it??
Of course you should be held liable. By your own admission you knew of the problem and didn't fix it. End of story.
Just for you to understand: a safe harbor situation happens only the the Internet access provider takes place to track access: either individual logins + passwords or tracking activity and storing the logs for N years. Absent such measures the access provider is liable for actions originating from his/her access point.
CEO's primary job is increasing share value. So why aren't they all just paid minimum wage, plus a bonus proportional to how much they increase shareholder value buy? Stock goes down, they eat beans and wieners for dinner.
Maybe it's like that because of this little known thing called the law of supply and demand: the supply of wanna-be CEOs is a function of the benefits offered by the companies in need of CEOs.
Amazing. One would think that a family with that sort of wealth at their disposal might be able to hire all sorts of nannies/governesses/tutors at any hour of the month to keep their kids occupied (and educated) while they slept in - whether on a weekend or on any other day of the week.
Cudos for keeping it real and staying in touch with how the other half ^H^H^H^H 99.9999% lives.
Amazing. One would think that an intelligent, educated reader of Slashdot might be able to understand that this is a highly "massaged" version of the real story, which Melinda Gates' PR department disseminates to the 99%.
Cudos for keeping your innocence and believing everything on the "Kardashians" TV shows.
a number of luminaries not the least of whom is Edward Snowden
I understand that one's hero is another one's traitor, and that's fine by me.
But to call Snowden "a luminary" takes a special kind of stupid...
I think Americans' (rightful) pride in the First Amendment has blinded many to the fact that legislators have basically stopped paying attention to the whole area of speech, and so there's a huge amount we'll-know-it-when-we-see-it arbitrary case law around things like free vs. criminal speech, what speech acts are protected from civil liability, etc.
You seem utterly uninformed on the topic you're publicly commenting. Free speech means the GOVERNMENT can't decide on behalf of the citizens what they can or can't say. As Twitter is not part of the government, any reference to free speech is idiotic.
Purely on a factual level, yes he was arrested
Actually, he was *NOT* arrested. He was detained.
By avoiding government systems Clinton potentially put lives, diplomatic relations, and US secrets at risk.
The emails in question were believed to not contain classified info
That's simply not true (and I'm surprised you could believe Clinton's utterly false claims). As per State department rules, anything related to foreign countries is classified by default, without any need for such marking.
Unfortunately that sort of intelligence - in both senses - is lacking in police forces these days
And you are qualified to make such grand generalizations about more than one million of LEOs based on what, exactly?
All these sources (the Guardian, Al Jazeera, and HuffPo) are known bastions of the left.
To bring them as proofs is akin to bring opinions on H-1B visas from Facebook, Microsoft, and IBM.
If it had anything at all to do with rape, the Swedish government would have taken Assange up on his offer to return to the country if they promised
Assange had no legal right to bargain with the Swedish authorities; the Swedish legal system precludes the prosecutors from striking the kind of deals Assange proposed. Assange obviously knew that - his whole act was for dramatic effect, not for any tangible benefit.
Long story short, Assange duped you.
things like rounding up and killing minorities which is the sort of thing we fought a war against people such as Goebbels to stop
Let's not get carried away by self-righteous rhetoric. No country fought war on Germany because of Germany's inhuman treatment on its minorities.
The fight against Germany had been caused either by being directly attacked by Germany (the case of Poland, USSR), being declared war by Germany (the case of the USA), or being mandated by existing alliances to go to war against Germany (the case of France or UK).
Plot twist: Billy Ocean was the good guy. His evil twin, otherwise...
I think you're really a special kind of stupid.
First of all, a company doing business in a country must respect and obey the laws of said country. That goes without even saying, moron. Apple has registered subsidiaries in China, nevermind their huge manufacturing sourcing business in mainland.
As for "gradually been bringing its manufacturing back home" this means you are too stupid to cross the street. No consumer IT / electronics company in the US, Apple included, can bring manufacturing back to the US. The ecosystem for the electronics is simply not available in the US anymore. Apple made some noise about that http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnfingleton/2013/11/03/reports-of-americas-manufacturing-renaissance-are-just-a-cruel-hoax/ but it's *NOISE*, nothing more.
What makes you so sure that Canada is willing to let you in with your firearms?
Which part of "on the way to the Canadian border" was somehow unclear to you?
At the time there were limited arms (you took about 2 minutes to reload) vs able to empty a couple clips in that same amount of time, now.
At the time the press was literally a mechanical device that took between 1 to 3 hours to print the first sheet of paper (I'm counting from before having the letters put in place).
Based on your cretinous logic, freedom of the press today should be limited to the technological limits 200 years ago.