What if the satellite has a thruster randomly firing? That would make it hard to predict just about anything about what it's orbits are going to look like.
The problem is that there are no 'low enough' taxes. Even if you slash taxes to 1%, there will still be an incentive to pay 0.5% to your lawyer and pay no taxes. The only problem is that you're then stuck with a country that can't afford to pay any public services.
Simple, tax multinational corporations at the highest tax rate of all the countries they do business in. If a company has offices in country A (tax rate 10%) and country B (tax rate 5%), have them pay 10% taxes on everything.
But there is another more important thing that should be done - prohibit corporations owning other corporations. Right now tax evasion is easy. Google US just has to open a subsidiary in a tax haven and route all it's profits through it. But what if it couldn't own that company. Sure, it's owners could open it themselves and run it as a separate entity. But then who in their right mind would keep shares of Google US, if it was making no profit? Why not sell them and just keep the shares of Google Bahamas?
But it's interesting how only some laws use the 'reasonable person' standard. Most reasonable people would consider what lobbyists do bribery and what the finance industry does to be fraud. But there laws use the 'overly pedantic lawyer' standard - if it's not spelled out (in triplicate) that something is a crime, then it's perfectly legal to do it.
Eh, that you sold the guy your eye was the 'normal' part of this encounter. That you buy back the pickled eye, pluck out your current eye (the barman helpfully cuts the optic nerve) and stuff the rapidly decomposing eye in your head is the really fun part.
But the case here was the 3 out of 6 were already getting the awesome things, and another 1 out of 6 were added. Now we just have to expand the coverage to the last 2 and everyone can be happy.
Enable anyone to designate any other person to be their 'partner', getting all the legal benefits of marriage.
But they don't lie about everything. If they did, it would be easy to know what they really mean, since it would just mean inverting all of their statements. So it's important to determine WHICH things they lie about.
There is another category : Things we did that we don't want to talk about.
Let's say the military has one of their SNAFUs and bombs a school full of kids. They have a perfectly good reason for not wanting the information to go public : their enemies could use it to whip up support and create more extremists. But there is another side to this. To hide it from the enemy you also have to hide it from your own public. In a dictatorship this wouldn't matter, but what about a democracy. How can people decide whether they support the war or not, when they aren't being given accurate information about it? Perhaps if the number of children killed by the army was reported, people would decide that the war just wasn't worth it and put pressure on the politicians to stop it.
Getting government of of marriage would be a long and difficult process. But isn't gay marriage a step in the right direction? If more and more people receive the benefits, then maybe someday everyone will. Long term partners could be next, then room mates,...
And the information the other users published isn't private - until they request FB removes it, after which it should be removed. And after that it's gone - no need to go looking through it again.
Well define offensively? Would they use it as a first strike weapon against one of their neighbors? Probably not. But what if the Palestinians somehow good enough weapons and training to take out their army? I'm not so sure the Israeli government wouldn't consider nuking them in that case.
I'm not quite sure what you're proposing. That any cargo is winched up 10km+, then transported to it's destination and dropped by parachute? Or should the balloons drag their cargo on 10km long ropes (actually that might be pretty fun, as long as you live underground and have a few cameras topside).
And at the same time their lift would also be lower - needing an even lighter construction. And what use would giant balloons be, if they were unable to ever land or even reduce their altitude?
But this is a machine that makes money. With other manufacturing equipment you have to decide what you want to make, set up the machines to make it, provide the raw materials and then sell your products. Each of those steps requires time, effort and some knowledge, which the equipment manufacturer might not have, making it more profitable for them to sell the equipment to someone that does. Here they basically plug in the machine and start raking in the profits.
Good idea. Now we just need to figure out how to be able to build it light enough to fly while being strong enough not to get crushed by the air pressure.
So what are you trying to say? Changing the owner of the equipment won't make it make more/less money. So it either produces enough money to pay for itself or it doesn't. And if the companies are selling it, the answer is probably that it doesn't or they'd just keep it and mint for themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
What if the satellite has a thruster randomly firing? That would make it hard to predict just about anything about what it's orbits are going to look like.
That's why the spammers will not be based in the US.
The problem is that there are no 'low enough' taxes. Even if you slash taxes to 1%, there will still be an incentive to pay 0.5% to your lawyer and pay no taxes. The only problem is that you're then stuck with a country that can't afford to pay any public services.
Simple, tax multinational corporations at the highest tax rate of all the countries they do business in. If a company has offices in country A (tax rate 10%) and country B (tax rate 5%), have them pay 10% taxes on everything.
But there is another more important thing that should be done - prohibit corporations owning other corporations. Right now tax evasion is easy. Google US just has to open a subsidiary in a tax haven and route all it's profits through it. But what if it couldn't own that company. Sure, it's owners could open it themselves and run it as a separate entity. But then who in their right mind would keep shares of Google US, if it was making no profit? Why not sell them and just keep the shares of Google Bahamas?
But, but, the cash they got wasn't a payment. It was a loan. The guy just decided that getting it repaid would be too much of a hassle.
But then wouldn't tax evasion also fall into the same category?
But it's interesting how only some laws use the 'reasonable person' standard.
Most reasonable people would consider what lobbyists do bribery and what the finance industry does to be fraud. But there laws use the 'overly pedantic lawyer' standard - if it's not spelled out (in triplicate) that something is a crime, then it's perfectly legal to do it.
Eh, that you sold the guy your eye was the 'normal' part of this encounter. That you buy back the pickled eye, pluck out your current eye (the barman helpfully cuts the optic nerve) and stuff the rapidly decomposing eye in your head is the really fun part.
Can a dog legally agree to be married?
But the case here was the 3 out of 6 were already getting the awesome things, and another 1 out of 6 were added. Now we just have to expand the coverage to the last 2 and everyone can be happy.
Enable anyone to designate any other person to be their 'partner', getting all the legal benefits of marriage.
But they don't lie about everything. If they did, it would be easy to know what they really mean, since it would just mean inverting all of their statements. So it's important to determine WHICH things they lie about.
There is another category : Things we did that we don't want to talk about.
Let's say the military has one of their SNAFUs and bombs a school full of kids. They have a perfectly good reason for not wanting the information to go public : their enemies could use it to whip up support and create more extremists.
But there is another side to this. To hide it from the enemy you also have to hide it from your own public. In a dictatorship this wouldn't matter, but what about a democracy. How can people decide whether they support the war or not, when they aren't being given accurate information about it? Perhaps if the number of children killed by the army was reported, people would decide that the war just wasn't worth it and put pressure on the politicians to stop it.
Was he employed (and paid) by a specific party or by the government? And wasn't that report an example of him being impartial?
Getting government of of marriage would be a long and difficult process. But isn't gay marriage a step in the right direction? If more and more people receive the benefits, then maybe someday everyone will. Long term partners could be next, then room mates,...
You are free to remember, you just can't keep records.
And the information the other users published isn't private - until they request FB removes it, after which it should be removed. And after that it's gone - no need to go looking through it again.
Well define offensively? Would they use it as a first strike weapon against one of their neighbors? Probably not.
But what if the Palestinians somehow good enough weapons and training to take out their army? I'm not so sure the Israeli government wouldn't consider nuking them in that case.
How much expertise is there in mining that isn't needed to optimize a system for mining?
And all of those problems will also be there for the bitcoin miner.
I'm not quite sure what you're proposing. That any cargo is winched up 10km+, then transported to it's destination and dropped by parachute? Or should the balloons drag their cargo on 10km long ropes (actually that might be pretty fun, as long as you live underground and have a few cameras topside).
And at the same time their lift would also be lower - needing an even lighter construction.
And what use would giant balloons be, if they were unable to ever land or even reduce their altitude?
But this is a machine that makes money.
With other manufacturing equipment you have to decide what you want to make, set up the machines to make it, provide the raw materials and then sell your products. Each of those steps requires time, effort and some knowledge, which the equipment manufacturer might not have, making it more profitable for them to sell the equipment to someone that does.
Here they basically plug in the machine and start raking in the profits.
Good idea. Now we just need to figure out how to be able to build it light enough to fly while being strong enough not to get crushed by the air pressure.
So what are you trying to say? Changing the owner of the equipment won't make it make more/less money. So it either produces enough money to pay for itself or it doesn't. And if the companies are selling it, the answer is probably that it doesn't or they'd just keep it and mint for themselves.
No, the thing that should be done is abolishing the security council. Or at least remove veto powers from the permanent members.