I don't think Apple has enough of a market share (yet) to be treated like a monopoly. But if they do manage to get it, the lawsuits should start pouring in.
I can't wait for a jury to find someone was justified in shooting a cop without warning, since the other guy was wearing a uniform and so the accused can obviously claim it was self defense.
Why does moving your servers to North Korea somehow imply your support for their government? All it would do is cause the US to hate them even more (if that's possible). So you're just exploiting the dictatorship, perhaps bringing it's end a bit closer (an extra server would cost them what? 20% of their national power supply?)
They each got something from the experience - the entertainment of seeing the other guy lick a frog. And they also owe the government some taxes for the 40 bucks they made.
Automation. The theory is that all production could be automated, so there is no need for workers to keep humanity fed and supplied with basic goods. You'd only need workers to invent new things etc.. So everyone could be provided with a basic income from the products of automation - no need for slaves. The people that chose to work would get an extra income as compensation.
You're right, but why blame SS? The taxes that are supposed to fund it are defined, and the fund has plenty of 'investments' in government bonds. It's the rest of the government's expenses that can't be supported by the taxes meant for them, and those departments haven't been funding the rest of the government in the past. So stop screaming about needing a SS reform and start screaming about needing a reform of just about everything else (or raising taxes).
So since the rest of government doesn't want to send a bad signal to it's lenders, it's going to repay the debt it owes to SS? Then why is everyone screaming that SS is going bankrupt?
Does the government have to honor debts? If it does, then the SS has enough bonds to keep going for quite a while. If it doesn't, then the deficit and nation debt are just illusions - then don't have to be repaid.
A lot of those 'obligations' are voluntary. They are equal to (in your example) buying a new iphone and computer each time a new one is released - just because you can. So why keep demanding that your landlord cut the rent instead of just getting a new phone every few years and having plenty of cash left over.
So SS works just like an investment? You put in X and get X + Y back. Why should this be cut when the people had no choice but to invest, while the people loaning money to the government of their own free will are guaranteed to get their money back with interest.
The only problem is that the current methods for taking them out end up just creating more of them. For every terrorist killed a dozen new ones sign up to fight America, since they've just seen their family/friends become collateral damage.
Sure in the short term that's fine - the new guys are untrained cannon fodder. But it does mean that the war on terror will have to continue indefinitely - it can never actually defeat the terrorists, just divert their attention to 'easy' targets, such as US personnel in the terrorist's back yard.
Or could it be that the other changes in the world contributed to it's decline? The new trade routes robbed it's traders of the exclusivity of their goods, stronger neighbors made it hard to capture (or even hold) land, new weapons made it impossible to rely on just city walls for defense,.....
Seems to be pretty independent to me. You have examples of government from both sides of the left/right axis being run well and being run into the ground.
How do you know we don't want to enter it? It could just as easily be the best thing that ever happened to mankind. And how would stopping discoveries help to fix the world? Help it revert back to the dark ages (after fossil fuels run out)?
The problem is that allowing people that want to limit the rights (to life among other things) of others allows their hate to spread.
The holocaust happened because the Nazis used the anger and frustration of the population after WW1 and the resulting economic collapse. Now they didn't cause the anger, but they did fuel it and focus it on their opposition and on the Jews. And they were allowed to do it because it was just words - until it wasn't. But by that time they had enough control over the police and army that there was nothing anyone could do (at least not from inside Germany).
And the Nazis were able to legally rise into (total) power because it was fine and dandy for them to preach (and carry out) attacks on opposing political parties. Even when it was known that they routinely attack their opponents they were still not prosecuted, and the leaders who encouraged these attacks were free to continue doing so.
That's the kind of freedom I oppose - the freedom do encourage and order violence while being protected by law just because you don't specify which member of the target group you want killed first.
If you scream while marching down the street in the company of a few hundred angry men that have been known to get violet at the slightest provocation for example.
But there is still a core functionality that every PC will have (as long as it's at least semi-current), about equal to a console. So why do game makers then complain about it being hard to make use of all the extra bells and whistles on the PC, when those things don't even exist on consoles.
You game demands a certain codes and player? Well package it in your game if it's not a standard part of the OS.
But what if people do burn the jews? Do the screamers keep their right to scream when it's nearly certain to result in deaths, even if they themselves are not likely to do the killing?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think Apple has enough of a market share (yet) to be treated like a monopoly. But if they do manage to get it, the lawsuits should start pouring in.
But probably not at this price.
I can't wait for a jury to find someone was justified in shooting a cop without warning, since the other guy was wearing a uniform and so the accused can obviously claim it was self defense.
Why does moving your servers to North Korea somehow imply your support for their government? All it would do is cause the US to hate them even more (if that's possible). So you're just exploiting the dictatorship, perhaps bringing it's end a bit closer (an extra server would cost them what? 20% of their national power supply?)
Wrong. That would just mean the taxpayers have to pay for removing them. Leave them on the front yards of the judges involved.
Weapon for clubbing the phone book publishers to death.
They each got something from the experience - the entertainment of seeing the other guy lick a frog. And they also owe the government some taxes for the 40 bucks they made.
Automation. The theory is that all production could be automated, so there is no need for workers to keep humanity fed and supplied with basic goods. You'd only need workers to invent new things etc.. So everyone could be provided with a basic income from the products of automation - no need for slaves. The people that chose to work would get an extra income as compensation.
Don't most Americans share most of their history with Europeans? After all they did move to their new home in the last few hundred years or so.
You're right, but why blame SS? The taxes that are supposed to fund it are defined, and the fund has plenty of 'investments' in government bonds. It's the rest of the government's expenses that can't be supported by the taxes meant for them, and those departments haven't been funding the rest of the government in the past. So stop screaming about needing a SS reform and start screaming about needing a reform of just about everything else (or raising taxes).
So since the rest of government doesn't want to send a bad signal to it's lenders, it's going to repay the debt it owes to SS? Then why is everyone screaming that SS is going bankrupt?
But was the update needed? Is there an enemy out there that you need a F-35 to fight?
Does that include interest?
Does the government have to honor debts? If it does, then the SS has enough bonds to keep going for quite a while. If it doesn't, then the deficit and nation debt are just illusions - then don't have to be repaid.
A lot of those 'obligations' are voluntary. They are equal to (in your example) buying a new iphone and computer each time a new one is released - just because you can.
So why keep demanding that your landlord cut the rent instead of just getting a new phone every few years and having plenty of cash left over.
So SS works just like an investment? You put in X and get X + Y back.
Why should this be cut when the people had no choice but to invest, while the people loaning money to the government of their own free will are guaranteed to get their money back with interest.
The only problem is that the current methods for taking them out end up just creating more of them. For every terrorist killed a dozen new ones sign up to fight America, since they've just seen their family/friends become collateral damage.
Sure in the short term that's fine - the new guys are untrained cannon fodder. But it does mean that the war on terror will have to continue indefinitely - it can never actually defeat the terrorists, just divert their attention to 'easy' targets, such as US personnel in the terrorist's back yard.
Or could it be that the other changes in the world contributed to it's decline?
The new trade routes robbed it's traders of the exclusivity of their goods, stronger neighbors made it hard to capture (or even hold) land, new weapons made it impossible to rely on just city walls for defense,.....
Seems to be pretty independent to me. You have examples of government from both sides of the left/right axis being run well and being run into the ground.
How do you know we don't want to enter it? It could just as easily be the best thing that ever happened to mankind. And how would stopping discoveries help to fix the world? Help it revert back to the dark ages (after fossil fuels run out)?
The problem is that allowing people that want to limit the rights (to life among other things) of others allows their hate to spread.
The holocaust happened because the Nazis used the anger and frustration of the population after WW1 and the resulting economic collapse. Now they didn't cause the anger, but they did fuel it and focus it on their opposition and on the Jews. And they were allowed to do it because it was just words - until it wasn't. But by that time they had enough control over the police and army that there was nothing anyone could do (at least not from inside Germany).
And the Nazis were able to legally rise into (total) power because it was fine and dandy for them to preach (and carry out) attacks on opposing political parties. Even when it was known that they routinely attack their opponents they were still not prosecuted, and the leaders who encouraged these attacks were free to continue doing so.
That's the kind of freedom I oppose - the freedom do encourage and order violence while being protected by law just because you don't specify which member of the target group you want killed first.
If you scream while marching down the street in the company of a few hundred angry men that have been known to get violet at the slightest provocation for example.
But there is still a core functionality that every PC will have (as long as it's at least semi-current), about equal to a console. So why do game makers then complain about it being hard to make use of all the extra bells and whistles on the PC, when those things don't even exist on consoles.
You game demands a certain codes and player? Well package it in your game if it's not a standard part of the OS.
But what if people do burn the jews? Do the screamers keep their right to scream when it's nearly certain to result in deaths, even if they themselves are not likely to do the killing?