The wonderful thing about using the numbers here is that it's a completely objective measure. Unlike "respect" which is harder to quantify.
Not really, since you are referencing the market. It is completely subjective. That there is some quantification involved does not mean that this view is shared by all. There is no independent reality here, just perception of value. TFA is calling attention to this value disparity.
Well what I suggested can also be done on a mass scale of smaller websites, individually that would hurt each site but if large parts of the Internet goes dark then customers will complain, consumer authorities will start questioning if they're really selling Internet access and things like that.
Web 2.0 doesn't really seem to include some "original" parts like Usenet, and what of it that still exists has been monetized. My employer, a large university, has given that segment over to Google and probably will do the same for email.
They'll just have some broad deals with an upstream provider to send and receive traffic, it's possible to put some sites on a shitlist but I think there will always be "everything else" traffic.
>If they start trying to gang up on the content providers, what's to stop the content providers from ganging up on them?
Why gang up when you can purchase like, say, Comcast did NBC Universal? Shhh....it will all be over soon. Just like ripping off a bandage over the info artery.
>>The economy is shit precisely because of intellectual property. China will never buy IP - why would they? They can pirate all they want as US police have no jurisdiction. So anyone who produces IP, instead of things that can be exported, represents a net loss of wealth to the country - they take money *only* from other Americans, while spending that money all over the world.
They do spend a considerable amount keeping the US economy afloat with cash that we gave them. Exactly who is at fault? They for taking it or U.S. for giving it away?
I'm just not intellectual enough to be able to understand why we are starting to place less value on humans just like our "trading partners".
Personally, I'll put even less value on human ideas than on the people themselves. Just my 2 cents (or whatever in yuan).......
I'd imagine it would be a lot more dangerous if it were more readily available. Turns out it might not be so cheap after all.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/324dyyg
Slashdot Mirror
Adnix, Sagan Contact.
That is all.
Bullshit. Nobody is "demonizing" anybody. A discussion of whether intelligence can be better utilized in other sectors is not out of line.
I'll demonize whomever I choose. In fact I'll demonize any institution that "burned down my house and lit it on fire with my 401k".
The wonderful thing about using the numbers here is that it's a completely objective measure. Unlike "respect" which is harder to quantify.
Not really, since you are referencing the market. It is completely subjective. That there is some quantification involved does not mean that this view is shared by all. There is no independent reality here, just perception of value. TFA is calling attention to this value disparity.
Well what I suggested can also be done on a mass scale of smaller websites, individually that would hurt each site but if large parts of the Internet goes dark then customers will complain, consumer authorities will start questioning if they're really selling Internet access and things like that.
Web 2.0 doesn't really seem to include some "original" parts like Usenet, and what of it that still exists has been monetized. My employer, a large university, has given that segment over to Google and probably will do the same for email.
They'll just have some broad deals with an upstream provider to send and receive traffic, it's possible to put some sites on a shitlist but I think there will always be "everything else" traffic.
I sincerely hope you're correct.
>If they start trying to gang up on the content providers, what's to stop the content providers from ganging up on them?
Why gang up when you can purchase like, say, Comcast did NBC Universal? Shhh....it will all be over soon. Just like ripping off a bandage over the info artery.
Is that because you didn't lose _your_ farm or because farms haven't been lost from GM material drifting elsewhere?
The former is your testimony and the latter is public record.
>>The economy is shit precisely because of intellectual property. China will never buy IP - why would they? They can pirate all they want as US police have no jurisdiction. So anyone who produces IP, instead of things that can be exported, represents a net loss of wealth to the country - they take money *only* from other Americans, while spending that money all over the world.
They do spend a considerable amount keeping the US economy afloat with cash that we gave them. Exactly who is at fault? They for taking it or U.S. for giving it away?
I'm just not intellectual enough to be able to understand why we are starting to place less value on humans just like our "trading partners".
Personally, I'll put even less value on human ideas than on the people themselves. Just my 2 cents (or whatever in yuan).......
I'd imagine it would be a lot more dangerous if it were more readily available. Turns out it might not be so cheap after all. http://preview.tinyurl.com/324dyyg