There are some areas where government is right to interfere. Just think about things people can't do without. Like food or power.
If the government just let market forces take over, then most food and power would be produced in neighboring countries. Which wouldn't be that bad if nothing changed.
But what happens if the neighbors notice that your country is missing such critical items? They can raise prices to whatever they want, and there is not much you can do about it until you rebuild your own power plants and grow your own food, but by that time they can again drop prices to the point where your production is again unprofitable.
Just think about it. They managed to trick people into putting much more money into the company then what it was worth. That money is still in the company now, even if the stock price crashed.
Why do people expect everyone to be thankful to the soldiers? They chose to join, they got paid, they got their benefits. They weren't forced and they didn't work for minimum wage. Not to mention that the country might be better off if fewer people joined the army. Hard to attack random countries if you're struggling to keep your forces up to strength even in peace time.
By the time you run out of places to put it, the first batch will be safe to dig up again. The Earth is a pretty big place, and the containers aren't all that big.
But how do you prevent other groups for campaigning for the politician? Sure you could limit the money they spend personally (their campaign). But you'd just get N new organizations that ran adds, which would be 'completely independent' of the official campaign.
If new reactors are designed to last 40 years according to what we know now, they will actually be LESS durable then the old designs. Since engineers know that the old safety margins were much larger then needed, they can cut costs by reducing them.
The problems will show up in 40 years when some politician/CEO decides that the reactors need to run for 80 years.
Isn't it the other way around? If there is a God then he/she/it can just remake humanity if it dies out (isn't that the plan anyway?) If there ISN'T a God, then once we die out we're gone forever.
So what you're saying is the freenet needs a EULA where members declare they are not going to send anything illegal. Once that is done, everyone is free from responsibility?
So are ISPs responsible for the packets they deliver? Is gmail responsible for the contents of the mail they store? Is Fedex responsible for the contents of their deliveries?
The Church itself does not pay taxes. At the same time, it most certainly seeks to influence the government. It's employees might not go as far as name a specific candidate the people should vote for, but they certainly let people know that the antichrist will get them if they vote for that damn dark soulless socialist. So the church keeps it's 'representation', as much as any other organization, while not paying taxes.
As for not allowing corporations that are tax exempt from contributing to campaigns - They'd just set up a dummy corp to funnel all of those bribes through.
So do you think church followers should be prevented from voting? After all, their organization is exempt from taxes, and 'no representation without taxation'.
Do you also support tax-free status for other corporations, on the condition they don't tell their employees and customers who they should vote for?
The more people that buy the drug the more expensive they'll make it. Not because they have to, but because the CAN. If you want increased demand to help promote efficiency and lower costs, you need to have competition. Without competition there is absolutely no reason for them to lower costs, when competition if stopped by patents.
And should people decide if they need a drug or not based on advertising? Or should they ask their doctor, who spends his life learning about health problems and remedies?
And should the doctor suddenly prescribe the drug to more people just because he's seen it on TV more often then that of a competitor? (Let's not even mention the 'gifts' he might receive if he's 'loyal' enough to a specific brand). Or should he trust scientific studies that were (hopefully) done when the drug was being developed and then undergoing trials?
Isn't 'getting railroaded into jail' exactly what is happening to Assange? He released some information that the US wanted to keep secret (acting like a journalist, except not being completely muzzled by the owners of his newspaper/TV station), so there were immediate demands that he be either locked up or just killed, even from members of the government.
So divide the punishment among the shareholders. Say the corporation commits murder. Have the 40 years sentence divided among all owners, in proportion to the number of shares they own. Just give them the opportunity to get a plea bargain by ratting out the executives who ordered the crime
It might still be possible for the publisher to prevent stores from selling used copies by inserting this prohibition into the contracts they have with the stores. My guess is that those contracts are still valid, it's just the license agreements that can't prevent resale.
And there you can see the problem. $1 million fine is the best they, or anyone before them, could do? What use is a punishment, if the company still profits from it's actions?
Imagine catching bank robbers and demanding they return some of the money they took, then letting them go. That is the kind of punishment that corporations receive after being caught breaking the law.
What does that have to do with it? This ruling is about people being allowed to sell software copies they own to other people, not forcing stores to buy those copies.
Slashdot Mirror
So why are there still US farmers? There have been subsidies in place for nearly 100 years, and the farmers haven't moved out of the country yet.
There are some areas where government is right to interfere. Just think about things people can't do without. Like food or power.
If the government just let market forces take over, then most food and power would be produced in neighboring countries. Which wouldn't be that bad if nothing changed.
But what happens if the neighbors notice that your country is missing such critical items? They can raise prices to whatever they want, and there is not much you can do about it until you rebuild your own power plants and grow your own food, but by that time they can again drop prices to the point where your production is again unprofitable.
Wasn't the IPO a good thing for facebook?
Just think about it. They managed to trick people into putting much more money into the company then what it was worth. That money is still in the company now, even if the stock price crashed.
Why do people expect everyone to be thankful to the soldiers? They chose to join, they got paid, they got their benefits. They weren't forced and they didn't work for minimum wage.
Not to mention that the country might be better off if fewer people joined the army. Hard to attack random countries if you're struggling to keep your forces up to strength even in peace time.
By the time you run out of places to put it, the first batch will be safe to dig up again. The Earth is a pretty big place, and the containers aren't all that big.
But how do you prevent other groups for campaigning for the politician? Sure you could limit the money they spend personally (their campaign). But you'd just get N new organizations that ran adds, which would be 'completely independent' of the official campaign.
If new reactors are designed to last 40 years according to what we know now, they will actually be LESS durable then the old designs. Since engineers know that the old safety margins were much larger then needed, they can cut costs by reducing them.
The problems will show up in 40 years when some politician/CEO decides that the reactors need to run for 80 years.
It's the tentaculats I'm more worried about
Isn't it the other way around? If there is a God then he/she/it can just remake humanity if it dies out (isn't that the plan anyway?)
If there ISN'T a God, then once we die out we're gone forever.
So what you're saying is the freenet needs a EULA where members declare they are not going to send anything illegal. Once that is done, everyone is free from responsibility?
So are ISPs responsible for the packets they deliver? Is gmail responsible for the contents of the mail they store? Is Fedex responsible for the contents of their deliveries?
The Church itself does not pay taxes. At the same time, it most certainly seeks to influence the government. It's employees might not go as far as name a specific candidate the people should vote for, but they certainly let people know that the antichrist will get them if they vote for that damn dark soulless socialist. So the church keeps it's 'representation', as much as any other organization, while not paying taxes.
As for not allowing corporations that are tax exempt from contributing to campaigns - They'd just set up a dummy corp to funnel all of those bribes through.
So do you think church followers should be prevented from voting? After all, their organization is exempt from taxes, and 'no representation without taxation'.
Do you also support tax-free status for other corporations, on the condition they don't tell their employees and customers who they should vote for?
The more people that buy the drug the more expensive they'll make it. Not because they have to, but because the CAN. If you want increased demand to help promote efficiency and lower costs, you need to have competition. Without competition there is absolutely no reason for them to lower costs, when competition if stopped by patents.
And should people decide if they need a drug or not based on advertising? Or should they ask their doctor, who spends his life learning about health problems and remedies?
And should the doctor suddenly prescribe the drug to more people just because he's seen it on TV more often then that of a competitor? (Let's not even mention the 'gifts' he might receive if he's 'loyal' enough to a specific brand). Or should he trust scientific studies that were (hopefully) done when the drug was being developed and then undergoing trials?
Sure you might get some negative karma. But just smiling at someone is probably enough to offset a few billion copies.
Isn't 'getting railroaded into jail' exactly what is happening to Assange? He released some information that the US wanted to keep secret (acting like a journalist, except not being completely muzzled by the owners of his newspaper/TV station), so there were immediate demands that he be either locked up or just killed, even from members of the government.
The part where they (the victims) only decided it was rape after finding out about the other woman?
Would those women be considered rape victims in any country except Sweden?
So divide the punishment among the shareholders. Say the corporation commits murder. Have the 40 years sentence divided among all owners, in proportion to the number of shares they own. Just give them the opportunity to get a plea bargain by ratting out the executives who ordered the crime
Everything they earn, except punishments or debts once they go bankrupt.
It might still be possible for the publisher to prevent stores from selling used copies by inserting this prohibition into the contracts they have with the stores. My guess is that those contracts are still valid, it's just the license agreements that can't prevent resale.
Cheap construction of buildings. Thin and poorly insulated walls don't keep the heat out, so they have to rely on AC to keep themselves from melting.
And there you can see the problem. $1 million fine is the best they, or anyone before them, could do? What use is a punishment, if the company still profits from it's actions?
Imagine catching bank robbers and demanding they return some of the money they took, then letting them go. That is the kind of punishment that corporations receive after being caught breaking the law.
What does that have to do with it? This ruling is about people being allowed to sell software copies they own to other people, not forcing stores to buy those copies.