Yeah, the really BIG molecules have cornered the market on sex appeal, it seems. Still, there aren't too many things in science that are more challenging than a total synthesis of a complex natural product ("small" molecules by molecular biology standards) with a dozen or so chiral centers...
I would personally like to shake your hand, if only I could. I had to scroll down almost to the bottom to do it, but at least I managed to find one non-idiotic post on this topic. Ironic, isn't it, that so many Nobel winners are Americans?
machines that do not come with Windows are generally priced equal to or more then the comparable system with Windows
Used to be that Microsoft would charge computer vendors according to how many machines - and not how many copies of Windows - they shipped. I.e., the hardware vendor would pay for a Windows license on a machine even if it shipped with an alternative OS, or none at all. Was this practice stopped by the antitrust action a few years ago?
Er... Yes; I screwed up because I don't get these very often.
Jon Stewart: So no one's going to be held accountable for this at all? Ed Helms: No. In fact, if history is any indication, they'll be hard-pressed finding enough medals to pin on these guys. My sources tell me the head of FEMA will be dipped in bronze and turned into an award to be given to other officials.
You misunderstand. I'm not suggesting that "corporations" are going to "overthrow" the government in some sort of coup. Nor am I concerned about corporate mercenaries forcing you to perform acts from which you'd prefer to abstain. That would be a horrendously expensive and inefficient - and therefore stupid - way to grab the levers of power. Perhaps you can think of other ways to access the effective power of government for a tiny fraction of that cost? I used the word "co-opt" rather than "overthrow" for a reason; you might look up the meaning of it of it's new to you. Then look at the recently passed energy bill and especially the process by which it was drafted (to the extent that this isn't a state secret, that is). As in many other areas, you'll see a lot of specific private interests being served, but almost no notion of a public interest at all.
As for Merck, they are still responsible for their own actions. Watch for that to change in the next few years, though; Repubs will dredge up a few examples of excessive awards to justify "tort reform" that will make it practically impossible for private citizens to hold corporations liable for anything, or even to enforce a contract.
As far as smart people not being allowed on juries is concerned, I can't disagree with you since I was kicked off of a medical malpractice jury myself when the plaintiff's attorney realized that I knew more than a little biology. But I do understand their rationale: They want jurors who will sympathize and identify with the suffering of the victim rather than the professional interests of the defendant. Your point here, though: I felt that some reform of the process might not be a bad idea.
Finally, your notion of "freedom" is a little blissful, I think. My dog is free in a sense that you would find perfectly satisfactory. Every aspect of her life is tightly controlled, but she's happy none the less because she doesn't want to displease me in any way!
I am still waiting for the day that any private company forces me to do anything against my will.
You'll only need to wait as long as it takes you to wake up, Ogemaniac. I'm not talking about just your employer taking an interest in your off-duty activities (although that certainly does happen and you may be able to escape it if you have alternative employment options and there's no blacklisting going on). I'm talking about what happens when private interests become so powerful that government itself becomes little more than their handmaiden. Perhaps you say what you say because you don't feel all of the strings that are attached to you, and where you do feel them you don't see where they ultimately lead. I invoked the 'f' word because, as everyone around here knows by now, Benito Mussolini defined it as the marriage of corporate and state power.
So, my questions for Libertarians remain: What is to prevent unchecked private interests from growing so powerful that they are able to completely co-opt government, and thereby the military and police? Why should we not expect this to occur as the natural course of events? And finally, once this "marriage" of corporate and government power is complete, how can a "free" society continue to exist?
Libertarians are the clowns swinging from the chandeliers.
And there they will continue to swing until they realize that the unchecked concentration of private power can be as oppressive as that of government power, and leads inexorably to fascism as the former consumes the latter. Could it possibly be happening here?
I'm surprised not to see more mention of commercials in theaters as an irritation, because that tops the list of them for me. When commercials (other than movie trailers and concession ads) started showing up back in the 80s, I remember audiences hissing and some people (e.g., me) would actually walk out, demanding refunds. Are people so cowed now that sitting through 20 minutes of commercials after having paid $10 for a ticket is just business as usual?
I don't know about you pal, but I'd take a hot date to my home theater over a public cinema any day.
Why not install your home theater system in the bedroom? That way you'd never even have to leave your room, let alone the house, and you could have your sex right there while the Star Trek episodes are still playing. What woman could pass that up?
I'll take this a step further: There is an actual War on Reason being pushed by conservative economic elites who have watched in horror as the government's reliance on science-driven policy has eroded their power and prerogatives.
Lookie: They've seen ecologists and biologists limit their rights to use public waterways as open sewers and to develop land wherever they wish. Now climatologists are warning about the consequences of rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere and the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels. Everywhere they turn, arrogant scientists are telling them what they can and can't do! What better way to rid themselves of the tyranny of science and reason than to overthrow it completely, and declare the new Faith-Based Nation?
Yup. The central contradiction of Libertarianism is that it fears the concentration of power by government but welcomes the accumulation of monopoly power in private hands. That's why it is inherently unstable, with Fascism as its endpoint (when private monopoly power completely co-opts government and public institutions).
Maybe the same level of corporate R&D is still being done, but is simply being moved to where it is cheaper. With "knowledge workers" plentiful in India, China, and elsewhere, why should multinational corporations have any continued interest in educational standards in countries where labor remains expensive?
Are you telling me that Christ didn't roam the Mediterranean hobnobbing with the rich, spitting on the poor, and preaching hatred against homosexuals? That can't be the Republican Jesus that I know!
This is exactly why the 1st amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
Actually it was the Devil that put that in there...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, the really BIG molecules have cornered the market on sex appeal, it seems. Still, there aren't too many things in science that are more challenging than a total synthesis of a complex natural product ("small" molecules by molecular biology standards) with a dozen or so chiral centers...
I would personally like to shake your hand, if only I could. I had to scroll down almost to the bottom to do it, but at least I managed to find one non-idiotic post on this topic. Ironic, isn't it, that so many Nobel winners are Americans?
Used to be that Microsoft would charge computer vendors according to how many machines - and not how many copies of Windows - they shipped. I.e., the hardware vendor would pay for a Windows license on a machine even if it shipped with an alternative OS, or none at all. Was this practice stopped by the antitrust action a few years ago?
Or, more to the point, unquestioning submission to human authority representing itself as divine...
Would this be the first Wookie ever to head a major corporation?
Works for my girlfriend...
Using IE, are we?
Indeed they could do that, but it's sufficient merely to stop using Yahoo and to influence their 1,000 closest friends to do likewise.
On the other hand, abusing your customers is rarely good for business, at least not for very long...
Then stop using it.
Oscar Had A Heap Of Apples.
Arrrrrr! But as you be downloading all of that free software, you can always pretend you be pirating it, matey!
Er... Yes; I screwed up because I don't get these very often.
Jon Stewart: So no one's going to be held accountable for this at all?
Ed Helms: No. In fact, if history is any indication, they'll be hard-pressed finding enough medals to pin on these guys. My sources tell me the head of FEMA will be dipped in bronze and turned into an award to be given to other officials.
Actually, when the incompetence is deliberate (as in the loading of all of the top jobs with starkly unqualified political cronies) it is malice.
Either way, somebody's in line for another Medal of Honor...
As for Merck, they are still responsible for their own actions. Watch for that to change in the next few years, though; Repubs will dredge up a few examples of excessive awards to justify "tort reform" that will make it practically impossible for private citizens to hold corporations liable for anything, or even to enforce a contract.
As far as smart people not being allowed on juries is concerned, I can't disagree with you since I was kicked off of a medical malpractice jury myself when the plaintiff's attorney realized that I knew more than a little biology. But I do understand their rationale: They want jurors who will sympathize and identify with the suffering of the victim rather than the professional interests of the defendant. Your point here, though: I felt that some reform of the process might not be a bad idea.
Finally, your notion of "freedom" is a little blissful, I think. My dog is free in a sense that you would find perfectly satisfactory. Every aspect of her life is tightly controlled, but she's happy none the less because she doesn't want to displease me in any way!
You'll only need to wait as long as it takes you to wake up, Ogemaniac. I'm not talking about just your employer taking an interest in your off-duty activities (although that certainly does happen and you may be able to escape it if you have alternative employment options and there's no blacklisting going on). I'm talking about what happens when private interests become so powerful that government itself becomes little more than their handmaiden. Perhaps you say what you say because you don't feel all of the strings that are attached to you, and where you do feel them you don't see where they ultimately lead. I invoked the 'f' word because, as everyone around here knows by now, Benito Mussolini defined it as the marriage of corporate and state power.
So, my questions for Libertarians remain: What is to prevent unchecked private interests from growing so powerful that they are able to completely co-opt government, and thereby the military and police? Why should we not expect this to occur as the natural course of events? And finally, once this "marriage" of corporate and government power is complete, how can a "free" society continue to exist?
And there they will continue to swing until they realize that the unchecked concentration of private power can be as oppressive as that of government power, and leads inexorably to fascism as the former consumes the latter. Could it possibly be happening here?
I'm surprised not to see more mention of commercials in theaters as an irritation, because that tops the list of them for me. When commercials (other than movie trailers and concession ads) started showing up back in the 80s, I remember audiences hissing and some people (e.g., me) would actually walk out, demanding refunds. Are people so cowed now that sitting through 20 minutes of commercials after having paid $10 for a ticket is just business as usual?
Why not install your home theater system in the bedroom? That way you'd never even have to leave your room, let alone the house, and you could have your sex right there while the Star Trek episodes are still playing. What woman could pass that up?
Lookie: They've seen ecologists and biologists limit their rights to use public waterways as open sewers and to develop land wherever they wish. Now climatologists are warning about the consequences of rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere and the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels. Everywhere they turn, arrogant scientists are telling them what they can and can't do! What better way to rid themselves of the tyranny of science and reason than to overthrow it completely, and declare the new Faith-Based Nation?
Thank God it can't happen here!
Maybe the same level of corporate R&D is still being done, but is simply being moved to where it is cheaper. With "knowledge workers" plentiful in India, China, and elsewhere, why should multinational corporations have any continued interest in educational standards in countries where labor remains expensive?
Are you telling me that Christ didn't roam the Mediterranean hobnobbing with the rich, spitting on the poor, and preaching hatred against homosexuals? That can't be the Republican Jesus that I know!
Actually it was the Devil that put that in there...