The problem there is that the populations in most western countries are already stagnant or even falling, so "breeding caps" would mostly apply to developing countries. There wouldn't be any political will to impose something like this.
I'm not an economist, but I would have thought a cashless society makes little difference to the level of government control. Cash is controlled by the government anyway - they can:
- outlaw/withdraw certain denominations (see India, Venuzuela) - change the format of the notes/coins, forcing everybody to swap them for new ones - change currency entirely, although this is normally done for reasons other than controlling a black market (new/old UK pound, Euro) - Flood the market with newly minted currency, devaluing the existing currency
At the end of the day, the best way to take wealth away from prying government control is to buy physical goods that maintain value pretty well in the long term. Maybe gold, although I don't know how practical that is for most people.
Evolution doesn't always work like that. One of the drivers for evolution can be the perceived attractiveness of a trait. For example, the males of the Irish Elk developed oversized antlers. These would have been more a hinderance than a help to the survival of the species. However, presumably the preferences of the females outweighed any disadvantages. For a while at least...
The same could happen with humans. If an inherited trait is desirable over a prolonged period, its presence in the population can grow. Or an undesirable trait can become less prominent.
I've heard that rubber, being organic, wouldn't be allowed as a raw material for the wheels - it might interfere with the tests to find organic materials on Mars. But maybe degradation is also a factor.
Since your question is general, not specific to this case - it depends on the Contract Law in whatever jurisdiction the employee works.
In most countries, the replacement will now be an employee. If the country provides protection to employees against termination, (s)he has it. The employer may have to suck up the additional costs of employing an extra employee. This is why dismissals should be undertaken with great care.
In reality, many countries allow a probationary period for new employees. If the employer isn't happy with the new employee by the end of the period (or even earlier), the employee can be et go with minimal fuss. So the replacement may be let go for any reason.
Google threatening to relocate its business to a friendlier European state is probably enough to make Irish politicians crap themselves and change the law to suit Google.
Except that in Ireland, the Judiciary is entirely independent of the government. One cannot interfere with the other. Erm, unless they happen to meet at one of those Bunga Bunga parties.
They're pretty much all CSRF vulnerabilities. Don't save your password to your router or don't use a common router IP address like 192.168.1.1
I'm scratching my head here - why would an address like 192.168.1.1 be a problem? It's only an internal IP address. An attack from the outside would come through the external IP address. Once they've breached the router, surely it'd be simple to find internal addresses anyway?
(Really hoping I don't have to re-address my stuff!)
Here's the actual effect it has had - everyone gets to pay more for data since everyone has to be able to tether. The new mandatory shared data plans are more expensive than older piecemeal plans. WHat about people that didn't want to pay for tethering? Too bad.
Or maybe this will happen instead...
Users will be able to use the data they're paying for, regardless of what device is consuming it. People who don't use much data will opt for cheaper capped plans that only offer as much data as they need.
Are you suggesting is that it's more expensive for my carrier if I consume 1MB of data on a tethered laptop than if I consume the same on a phone-based browser? Or that people who don't use all the data they're paying for should be subsidising those who do?
Note: I don't support government intervention often, but the overall good of everybody is tied into our technological devices today in the same way that it once was in a fair market for automobiles.
I would have thought that the concept of patents and copyright are instances of government intervention. The government creates the legislation that grants temporary(!) monopolies to holders of these patents.
Lack of government intervention would mean that no such monopolies could be enforced.
It still wasn't an automatic install. You could uncheck the box and it wouldn't install. By definition, an automatic install is an install that happens no matter what you do.
That's a strange interpretation of "automatic". There's nothing in the definition of the word "automatic" that says you can't do something in advance to prevent the event from happening.
I don't believe that it causes any servers to come into existence.
I know you're having a laugh, but that sums up my experience of help from the Linux community - technically correct, but obviously doesn't help the poor guy.
A community is made from individuals that have to take responsibility for themselves. Can't afford kids? Don't have any.
Firsly, a healthy community is made of a mixture of people, including the young, the old, and the sick, who cannot take responsibility for themselves. A community where everybody takes responsibility for themselves is also known as a gang.
Secondly, there is some logic to saying that it's a bad idea to have kids that you can't afford. However, whether or not you can afford kids partly depends on the aids (financial and otherwise) that are provided by society. If these change, people can be left in trouble.
Thirdly, you are very unlikely to take responsibility for yourself forever. I don't know what country you live in, or how wealthy you think you'll be, but most retirement investment products are pyramid schemes. They depend on a larger population of young people, whose current premiums are paying the pensions of the smaller population of old people. As long as the population of contributors keeps growing, there's no problem. But it does mean that even with the pension investment product that I assume you're paying into, when you retire you'll still need a larger population of paying young people to provide your retirement income. Most societies recognise that a growing population of young people is necessary to the economy and to the society, and so they encourage childbirth with incentives (financial and otherwise).
seriously, tell me why the fuck pakistan or india need nukes? there's no serious threat of invasion to either of them, they have no powerful international enemies. sure they fight amongest each other in a few disputed area's but it's nothing conventional weapons can't handle. I would suggest that a country like India or Pakistan is more likely to be fighting a war on its own doorstep than either the USA or Russia is. Although I would disagree with them, I can at least see the logic behind either India or Pakistan saying they need nuclear weapons as a deterent.
But can you seriously imagine the USA needing nuclear weapons because of an invasion by a foreign army? Or Britain? Or Russia? Those countries are just waving their dangly-bits around. And it makes it difficult to take seriously their attempts to disarm other countries.
Being from a country that has no nuclear weapons, and barely has an armed force at all, I fail to see why a huge, powerful country feels insecure enough to need nuclear weapons.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem there is that the populations in most western countries are already stagnant or even falling, so "breeding caps" would mostly apply to developing countries. There wouldn't be any political will to impose something like this.
I'm not an economist, but I would have thought a cashless society makes little difference to the level of government control. Cash is controlled by the government anyway - they can:
- outlaw/withdraw certain denominations (see India, Venuzuela)
- change the format of the notes/coins, forcing everybody to swap them for new ones
- change currency entirely, although this is normally done for reasons other than controlling a black market (new/old UK pound, Euro)
- Flood the market with newly minted currency, devaluing the existing currency
At the end of the day, the best way to take wealth away from prying government control is to buy physical goods that maintain value pretty well in the long term. Maybe gold, although I don't know how practical that is for most people.
Evolution doesn't always work like that. One of the drivers for evolution can be the perceived attractiveness of a trait. For example, the males of the Irish Elk developed oversized antlers. These would have been more a hinderance than a help to the survival of the species. However, presumably the preferences of the females outweighed any disadvantages. For a while at least...
The same could happen with humans. If an inherited trait is desirable over a prolonged period, its presence in the population can grow. Or an undesirable trait can become less prominent.
I've heard that rubber, being organic, wouldn't be allowed as a raw material for the wheels - it might interfere with the tests to find organic materials on Mars. But maybe degradation is also a factor.
First world problems strike again.
Guess what - people who live in the "First World" often discuss "First World Problems".
There are plenty of sites that only discuss third world problems. You're free to join one, and take your smugness with you.
Yeah, but just watch their productivity once they learn about unions.
Since your question is general, not specific to this case - it depends on the Contract Law in whatever jurisdiction the employee works.
In most countries, the replacement will now be an employee. If the country provides protection to employees against termination, (s)he has it. The employer may have to suck up the additional costs of employing an extra employee. This is why dismissals should be undertaken with great care.
In reality, many countries allow a probationary period for new employees. If the employer isn't happy with the new employee by the end of the period (or even earlier), the employee can be et go with minimal fuss. So the replacement may be let go for any reason.
Google threatening to relocate its business to a friendlier European state is probably enough to make Irish politicians crap themselves and change the law to suit Google.
Except that in Ireland, the Judiciary is entirely independent of the government. One cannot interfere with the other. Erm, unless they happen to meet at one of those Bunga Bunga parties.
They're pretty much all CSRF vulnerabilities. Don't save your password to your router or don't use a common router IP address like 192.168.1.1
I'm scratching my head here - why would an address like 192.168.1.1 be a problem? It's only an internal IP address. An attack from the outside would come through the external IP address. Once they've breached the router, surely it'd be simple to find internal addresses anyway?
(Really hoping I don't have to re-address my stuff!)
So what added protections does Steam grant to a European that aren't granted to an American?
Interesting. From the same document:
Perhaps those at the top should lead by example?
You might think forced free tethering is awesome.
Here's the actual effect it has had - everyone gets to pay more for data since everyone has to be able to tether. The new mandatory shared data plans are more expensive than older piecemeal plans. WHat about people that didn't want to pay for tethering? Too bad.
Or maybe this will happen instead...
Users will be able to use the data they're paying for, regardless of what device is consuming it. People who don't use much data will opt for cheaper capped plans that only offer as much data as they need.
Are you suggesting is that it's more expensive for my carrier if I consume 1MB of data on a tethered laptop than if I consume the same on a phone-based browser? Or that people who don't use all the data they're paying for should be subsidising those who do?
Actually, this could be good.
If I fail exams and have to repeat a year or two, I don't have to pay extra for those years?
I bet that occurs far more often than people finishing early.
Note: I don't support government intervention often, but the overall good of everybody is tied into our technological devices today in the same way that it once was in a fair market for automobiles.
I would have thought that the concept of patents and copyright are instances of government intervention. The government creates the legislation that grants temporary(!) monopolies to holders of these patents.
Lack of government intervention would mean that no such monopolies could be enforced.
Ah, but you're using logic. That's not how the law works.
It still wasn't an automatic install. You could uncheck the box and it wouldn't install. By definition, an automatic install is an install that happens no matter what you do.
That's a strange interpretation of "automatic". There's nothing in the definition of the word "automatic" that says you can't do something in advance to prevent the event from happening.
I don't believe that it causes any servers to come into existence.
I know you're having a laugh, but that sums up my experience of help from the Linux community - technically correct, but obviously doesn't help the poor guy.
Sorry, I meant "Wikileaks isn't an **American** organisation"...
I should ease off on the beer.
They obtained those documents illegally
Illegal where? You know Wikileaks isn't an illegal organisation, right?\
Or am I wrong to be sitting here drinking a bottle of beer, because it's illegal in some other country?
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
800x600? Pah, anything less than 1280x800 just isn't worth it for reading
Depends on what books you have, I suppose. My books have words rather than pictures, and I find the 600x800 screen of my eReader very good.
A community is made from individuals that have to take responsibility for themselves. Can't afford kids? Don't have any.
Firsly, a healthy community is made of a mixture of people, including the young, the old, and the sick, who cannot take responsibility for themselves. A community where everybody takes responsibility for themselves is also known as a gang.
Secondly, there is some logic to saying that it's a bad idea to have kids that you can't afford. However, whether or not you can afford kids partly depends on the aids (financial and otherwise) that are provided by society. If these change, people can be left in trouble.
Thirdly, you are very unlikely to take responsibility for yourself forever. I don't know what country you live in, or how wealthy you think you'll be, but most retirement investment products are pyramid schemes. They depend on a larger population of young people, whose current premiums are paying the pensions of the smaller population of old people. As long as the population of contributors keeps growing, there's no problem. But it does mean that even with the pension investment product that I assume you're paying into, when you retire you'll still need a larger population of paying young people to provide your retirement income. Most societies recognise that a growing population of young people is necessary to the economy and to the society, and so they encourage childbirth with incentives (financial and otherwise).
Yeah, well, ten years ago I proved I can see my toes. Doesn't mean I can now.
But can you seriously imagine the USA needing nuclear weapons because of an invasion by a foreign army? Or Britain? Or Russia? Those countries are just waving their dangly-bits around. And it makes it difficult to take seriously their attempts to disarm other countries.
Being from a country that has no nuclear weapons, and barely has an armed force at all, I fail to see why a huge, powerful country feels insecure enough to need nuclear weapons.
You're making the assumption that a commercial organisation will put the customer's convenience above its own money-making schemes?