First, a person does not have to be (say) black to care about blacks. Despite what certain Leftists say, the world is not moved by selfish class struggle.
Nice strawman. No one's saying that. The opposite is true. Poor white people in the south and midwest are voting for guys who do not give a shit about their best interests. It's the "What's the Matter with Kansas?" problem. They're getting poorer because they're voting against their own interests.
Also, yes I've demonstrated there are a lot of rich white guys who genuinely give a shit about poor black guys. But maybe instead of being patronizing and letting the boring ass white guys run shit maybe we can get some people of color in the halls of power to make a few decisions. Or are you afraid that Louis CK's prediction that, "We[white people] are going to have to pay for this one. They're going to tie us down and fuck us in the ass." ? I guarantee that isn't going to happen. Just let a few people who don't look like the cover of an Osmond's album work on things that might actually affect them or their families.
Second, one thing is to ensure equal treatment before the law, and some positive help for the needy. Another thing is to ensure equal outcomes, which inevitably results in authoritarianism.
I can't discriminate against blacks, gays, transpeople or Muslims/Atheists/Jews/Fringe_Christian_sect_here! The horror!
Also, this is so fucking stupid. Yes, we have authoritarianism. We have centralized authority. That's the basis of modern law and order. I think it's gotten us a lot of wrong things, but it's also gotten us a lot of good things and wins only because we don't have a better options. Heaven for-fucking-bid we all have to play by some sort of social rules.
Third, the Left is horribly hypocritical when it comes to religious minorities. If someone smears a politician with accusations that he is Muslim, the Left jumps to support that politician, because Islamophobia has no place in America. But, on the other hand, if some politician is accused of having attended spiritual lectures at Opus Dei, then the Left yells, barks, and foams at the mouth with hatred.
Again, nice strawman. Show me ONE Democratic Senator who's called for the shaming of Opus Dei members? Or Quakers, Mormons, Shakers, 7th Day Adventists?
Granted there's a lot of *NUANCE* here. If you're attending a church that supports ending teaching of sex ed or evolution and then you go espouse that belief on the House or Senate floor, it's not that you're a Christian, it's that you're a member of a group that's using faith as a weapon in social struggles. Just happening to be Christian and just happening to be Muslim are two different thresholds.
Name ONE politician who's a radical Muslim calling for any number of the batshit things being said right now in the halls of power in this country.
Name. ONE. And name an OPEN and OUT politico who's calling for it. No secret muslim bullshit here. I'm willing to bet you're not going to find anyone on the level of notoriety of a Michelle Bauchmann, or Rand Paul, or any number of other batshit crazy Christian politicians out there.
So you should be all for a guy who is laser-focused on reducing the country's aggressive debt death-spiral. Because the poor and down-trodden who've been trained for decades to expect someone else to provide for them are going to have the worst of it when get to the point where several people are living off of the taxes being paid by only one or two people.
Yes, I'm voting for the guy who suggests we need to raise taxes on the top %2.
Yes, we do. We have a government that spends wildly more money than it takes through taxes. Taxing millionaires at a rate of 100% of their earnings wouldn't even pay the federal deficit through the first fiscal quarter of the year, let alone touch the debt and the choking interest service we're all passing along to future generations. You cannot tax the economy into prosperity, and you cannot continue to dole out vastly more borrowed money without economic prosperity to back it up.
That's a cute statistic. No one's suggesting we tax zillionaires at 100%. At most? 40 or 50. Also, proposals are to also reinstate multiple taxes including closing corporate tax loopholes.
As far as taxing the economy into prosperity, yes. We can. By taxing at 40~ ish percent. Which is what Obama wants to do. That with reducing medicare costs, the military budget and a few other cuts, should do the trick.
Paul Ryan voted for the massive Bush tax cuts. He also voted to go to war(Hillz also voted to go to war, but she also didn't vote for the Bush tax cut). He voted on a lot of things that totally buggered our national debt. Deficit hawk? Nope. Just chuck testa.
No, the joke is you perpetuating that nice little lefty lie. But you know it is, so I won't bother pointing out the actual details. The most important one, of course, is that medicare is already dead. Do the math. It's falling off a cliff. The people who actually, really need it - the sort of people you seem to want to claim you care about - are once again going to be the worst-off as that corrupt, nonsensical, and bankrupt program fails and chases doctors away from it as fast as they can back out of the paperwork.
Ryan and his idealogical partners can't kill something that's already dying. Only reducing the rate at which it grossly wastes money can help it, and that's something that Pelosi, Reid, and Obama have not only avoided doing, they crafted a law specifically to get around having to address it. But the math is unavoidable, and Ryan at least as the manners not to sugarcoat the issue and pretend - as you're doing, and as Joe Biden does whenever asked - that it doesn't exist.
No, Medicare's solvent for another decade to come, and if we close the donut hole and increase the ridiculously tiny amount we tax on it, it can be solvent in perpetuity. If we didn't raid Medicare and Social Security to pay for tax cuts for the rich, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now.
Taxes are at an ALL TIME LOW. Defense spending is also at an ALL TIME HIGH. (see: this.).
Cut defense spending, increase taxes, close tax loopholes and maybe stop picking fights with third world countries in wars we can't win. Obama's not receptive to the first part, but everything else? I'll take it. Romney's not even close to listening and Ryan's budget plan *increases* defense spending.
Sure, if whites were an oppressed minority, let's get a white guy to solve all the problems straight white males face for being straight white males.
But that's simply not a set of problems we as a people face. A straight white guy isn't struggling the same way a Haitian transwoman lesbian would be. Could it possibly be that the Haitian transwoman lesbian has a high powered job and the straight white guy is cleaning sinks for a living? Sure. But that instance doesn't change the fact that on average, the straight white dude is going to come out a head in terms of job seeking, college entrance and home ownership simply because he's white, straight and male.
We do actually have a lot of social issues for trans, gay, racial minorities and religious minorities. It'd be nice for the GOP to acknowledge that we even have gay, trans, brown people who might not be christian.
Did I say intelligence? I said point of view. There are a ton of straight non-transgender white guys that I'd trust to have the interests of us all at heart. Joe Biden, for instance.
Granted, but to have a better understanding of a particular group, say, what it's like growing up or being black, I'd rather get a black guy to do the job. Constitutionally there's not much for the VP to do other than to break ties in the senate and wait for the President to take it in the squash and ascend. So the VP spends a lot of time setting agenda and policy work. It'd be nice if some of that policy work went towards making life better for oppressed
The selection of Paul Ryan by the GOP and the RMoney campaign just shows that they don't have a fucking grip on reality. We have serious problems in this country. Putting the 'kill medicare' guy into office is kind of a huge joke.
Yes. When it comes to formulating policy both foreign and domestic, having the point of view of someone who isn't white, upper class, heterosexual and non-transgendered might help when you're trying to figure out what to do for new orleans or maybe what to do in Myanmar.
Right now, Mitt Romney's foreign policy team is the old GWB foreign policy team. How the fuck do you fail that badly and still get to play? I don't even fucking know.
Scarcity is real. If you don't believe me, think to yourself when you ABSOLUTELY need a pen or a pencil how much you'd be willing to pay for a Bic ball point that comes in a 10 pack for 4 bucks.
In 2010, the video gaming industry made 66 BILLION. Saganesque billions and billions and they can't turn a healthy enough profit?
The business model for gaming has failed. The answer isn't digital either. Digital distribution only makes it easier to fail in the market place and do it faster too.
The problem is management. Management is failing in a big way. Even with Valve, Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Google and Apple's pound of flesh, there's no way in hell margins so thin that used game sales threaten it can be considered "healthy." Even in volume. Maybe especially considering the volume that some games sell at.
Where the fuck is all that money going? Is it a matter of creative Hollywood accounting or is there bigger costs involved with pushing pixels through silicon?
Yes but they failed to capture the market. The iPad still dominates. No one's selling these damned things. They ship, sure, but they're not *selling*. They're not being used in terms of browsing statistics.
Same joke, different actors. Like I said. Don't get me wrong, probably good, maybe even awesome, but no one's buying them.
This, combined with the fact that post-iPhone samsung freaking PANICKED and said, "We've got a crisis of design and we're going to copy the iPhone, now."?
The lg prada and the F700 had plastic screens, no multitouch and missing a number of other design elements. When the iPhone was released, Samsung internal memos stated that they were in a crisis of design and to copy the iPhone. They also became obsessed with destroying Apple sometime in 2010.
And Jony Ive has been open with the fact that he gets inspiration from Braun, Sony and other firms.
The problem here isn't that Samsung is being inspired by the iPhone, it's that they aren't adding new ideas and with the S3, we see a huge improvement, but the fact that it still has the IPhone like menu button is disconcerting.
The current mobile phone landscape is depressing. Apple is one of the few firms with good ideas, although HTC and Nokia are really on base lately and I hope that trend continues, but they're being jerks. Nearly everyone else has no ideas and that's worse. At least apple is bringing something new to the table.
Because not everything you learn should relate to business or your job after school.
Education should be about exposure to a lot more than just work. Opening your eyes to new experiences, new information and understandings of the universe and the humanity around you should be priority one.
I mean, I've never had the urge to shoot my best friend and save him from a lynch mob after he got into some trouble with the locals. So why should I have to read Of Mice and Men?
The problem isn't that school is hard and we should do away with math. It's that our culture doesn't emphasize knowledge and intelligence isn't respected. There's actually a wave of antiintellectualism that has major states of our nation considering removing key parts of cosmology, biology, geology, etc with NONSENSE.
I don't expect everyone to go into fields they don't want to. If you don't have the heart to go into the arts, then don't. If you were never exposed to the arts, then that means that's another potential artist lost.
Same with maths and sciences. We don't know. It shouldn't be this way, but that's the way it is.
Slashdot Mirror
First, a person does not have to be (say) black to care about blacks. Despite what certain Leftists say, the world is not moved by selfish class struggle.
Nice strawman. No one's saying that. The opposite is true. Poor white people in the south and midwest are voting for guys who do not give a shit about their best interests. It's the "What's the Matter with Kansas?" problem. They're getting poorer because they're voting against their own interests.
Also, yes I've demonstrated there are a lot of rich white guys who genuinely give a shit about poor black guys. But maybe instead of being patronizing and letting the boring ass white guys run shit maybe we can get some people of color in the halls of power to make a few decisions. Or are you afraid that Louis CK's prediction that, "We[white people] are going to have to pay for this one. They're going to tie us down and fuck us in the ass." ? I guarantee that isn't going to happen. Just let a few people who don't look like the cover of an Osmond's album work on things that might actually affect them or their families.
Second, one thing is to ensure equal treatment before the law, and some positive help for the needy. Another thing is to ensure equal outcomes, which inevitably results in authoritarianism.
I can't discriminate against blacks, gays, transpeople or Muslims/Atheists/Jews/Fringe_Christian_sect_here! The horror!
Also, this is so fucking stupid. Yes, we have authoritarianism. We have centralized authority. That's the basis of modern law and order. I think it's gotten us a lot of wrong things, but it's also gotten us a lot of good things and wins only because we don't have a better options. Heaven for-fucking-bid we all have to play by some sort of social rules.
Third, the Left is horribly hypocritical when it comes to religious minorities. If someone smears a politician with accusations that he is Muslim, the Left jumps to support that politician, because Islamophobia has no place in America. But, on the other hand, if some politician is accused of having attended spiritual lectures at Opus Dei, then the Left yells, barks, and foams at the mouth with hatred.
Again, nice strawman. Show me ONE Democratic Senator who's called for the shaming of Opus Dei members? Or Quakers, Mormons, Shakers, 7th Day Adventists?
Granted there's a lot of *NUANCE* here. If you're attending a church that supports ending teaching of sex ed or evolution and then you go espouse that belief on the House or Senate floor, it's not that you're a Christian, it's that you're a member of a group that's using faith as a weapon in social struggles. Just happening to be Christian and just happening to be Muslim are two different thresholds.
Name ONE politician who's a radical Muslim calling for any number of the batshit things being said right now in the halls of power in this country.
Name. ONE. And name an OPEN and OUT politico who's calling for it. No secret muslim bullshit here. I'm willing to bet you're not going to find anyone on the level of notoriety of a Michelle Bauchmann, or Rand Paul, or any number of other batshit crazy Christian politicians out there.
So you should be all for a guy who is laser-focused on reducing the country's aggressive debt death-spiral. Because the poor and down-trodden who've been trained for decades to expect someone else to provide for them are going to have the worst of it when get to the point where several people are living off of the taxes being paid by only one or two people.
Yes, I'm voting for the guy who suggests we need to raise taxes on the top %2.
Yes, we do. We have a government that spends wildly more money than it takes through taxes. Taxing millionaires at a rate of 100% of their earnings wouldn't even pay the federal deficit through the first fiscal quarter of the year, let alone touch the debt and the choking interest service we're all passing along to future generations. You cannot tax the economy into prosperity, and you cannot continue to dole out vastly more borrowed money without economic prosperity to back it up.
That's a cute statistic. No one's suggesting we tax zillionaires at 100%. At most? 40 or 50. Also, proposals are to also reinstate multiple taxes including closing corporate tax loopholes.
As far as taxing the economy into prosperity, yes. We can. By taxing at 40~ ish percent. Which is what Obama wants to do. That with reducing medicare costs, the military budget and a few other cuts, should do the trick.
Paul Ryan voted for the massive Bush tax cuts. He also voted to go to war(Hillz also voted to go to war, but she also didn't vote for the Bush tax cut). He voted on a lot of things that totally buggered our national debt. Deficit hawk? Nope. Just chuck testa.
No, the joke is you perpetuating that nice little lefty lie. But you know it is, so I won't bother pointing out the actual details. The most important one, of course, is that medicare is already dead. Do the math. It's falling off a cliff. The people who actually, really need it - the sort of people you seem to want to claim you care about - are once again going to be the worst-off as that corrupt, nonsensical, and bankrupt program fails and chases doctors away from it as fast as they can back out of the paperwork.
Ryan and his idealogical partners can't kill something that's already dying. Only reducing the rate at which it grossly wastes money can help it, and that's something that Pelosi, Reid, and Obama have not only avoided doing, they crafted a law specifically to get around having to address it. But the math is unavoidable, and Ryan at least as the manners not to sugarcoat the issue and pretend - as you're doing, and as Joe Biden does whenever asked - that it doesn't exist.
No, Medicare's solvent for another decade to come, and if we close the donut hole and increase the ridiculously tiny amount we tax on it, it can be solvent in perpetuity. If we didn't raid Medicare and Social Security to pay for tax cuts for the rich, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now.
Taxes are at an ALL TIME LOW. Defense spending is also at an ALL TIME HIGH. (see: this.).
Cut defense spending, increase taxes, close tax loopholes and maybe stop picking fights with third world countries in wars we can't win. Obama's not receptive to the first part, but everything else? I'll take it. Romney's not even close to listening and Ryan's budget plan *increases* defense spending.
Sure, if whites were an oppressed minority, let's get a white guy to solve all the problems straight white males face for being straight white males.
But that's simply not a set of problems we as a people face. A straight white guy isn't struggling the same way a Haitian transwoman lesbian would be. Could it possibly be that the Haitian transwoman lesbian has a high powered job and the straight white guy is cleaning sinks for a living? Sure. But that instance doesn't change the fact that on average, the straight white dude is going to come out a head in terms of job seeking, college entrance and home ownership simply because he's white, straight and male.
We do actually have a lot of social issues for trans, gay, racial minorities and religious minorities. It'd be nice for the GOP to acknowledge that we even have gay, trans, brown people who might not be christian.
Did I say intelligence? I said point of view. There are a ton of straight non-transgender white guys that I'd trust to have the interests of us all at heart. Joe Biden, for instance.
Granted, but to have a better understanding of a particular group, say, what it's like growing up or being black, I'd rather get a black guy to do the job. Constitutionally there's not much for the VP to do other than to break ties in the senate and wait for the President to take it in the squash and ascend. So the VP spends a lot of time setting agenda and policy work. It'd be nice if some of that policy work went towards making life better for oppressed
The selection of Paul Ryan by the GOP and the RMoney campaign just shows that they don't have a fucking grip on reality. We have serious problems in this country. Putting the 'kill medicare' guy into office is kind of a huge joke.
Yes. When it comes to formulating policy both foreign and domestic, having the point of view of someone who isn't white, upper class, heterosexual and non-transgendered might help when you're trying to figure out what to do for new orleans or maybe what to do in Myanmar.
Right now, Mitt Romney's foreign policy team is the old GWB foreign policy team. How the fuck do you fail that badly and still get to play? I don't even fucking know.
Scarcity is real. If you don't believe me, think to yourself when you ABSOLUTELY need a pen or a pencil how much you'd be willing to pay for a Bic ball point that comes in a 10 pack for 4 bucks.
In 2010, the video gaming industry made 66 BILLION. Saganesque billions and billions and they can't turn a healthy enough profit?
The business model for gaming has failed. The answer isn't digital either. Digital distribution only makes it easier to fail in the market place and do it faster too.
The problem is management. Management is failing in a big way. Even with Valve, Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, Google and Apple's pound of flesh, there's no way in hell margins so thin that used game sales threaten it can be considered "healthy." Even in volume. Maybe especially considering the volume that some games sell at.
Where the fuck is all that money going? Is it a matter of creative Hollywood accounting or is there bigger costs involved with pushing pixels through silicon?
Slashdot needs a +1 God Tier trolling.
Yes but they failed to capture the market. The iPad still dominates. No one's selling these damned things. They ship, sure, but they're not *selling*. They're not being used in terms of browsing statistics.
Same joke, different actors. Like I said. Don't get me wrong, probably good, maybe even awesome, but no one's buying them.
What about the Kindle Fire? The Xoom? The Transformer and the Iconia? The various Samsung Galaxy Tabs?
Same joke, different actors. Seriously.
This has been 2 nearly 3 years after the iPad.
This is literally moving the goal posts.
Try again.
8 percent of all tablet traffic is on Android. Well. 9 percent that isn't iOS.
Try again. The tablet market is an iPad market.
It was the magistrate that decided that the evidence was inadmissible not Judge Koh. Koh only concurred with the magistrate.
Samsung shot themselves in the foot. They have this entire case. This is not going to end well for them.
Yeah. actually.
This, combined with the fact that post-iPhone samsung freaking PANICKED and said, "We've got a crisis of design and we're going to copy the iPhone, now."?
Samsung copied Apple.
Okay.
There has been much time uploaded to YouTube and in the press where Microsoft explains and justifies their design decisions.
They're trying. But they're certainly not copying Apple. I also think they're wrong as hell too, but...
The lg prada and the F700 had plastic screens, no multitouch and missing a number of other design elements. When the iPhone was released, Samsung internal memos stated that they were in a crisis of design and to copy the iPhone. They also became obsessed with destroying Apple sometime in 2010.
Try again.
And Jony Ive has been open with the fact that he gets inspiration from Braun, Sony and other firms.
The problem here isn't that Samsung is being inspired by the iPhone, it's that they aren't adding new ideas and with the S3, we see a huge improvement, but the fact that it still has the IPhone like menu button is disconcerting.
The current mobile phone landscape is depressing. Apple is one of the few firms with good ideas, although HTC and Nokia are really on base lately and I hope that trend continues, but they're being jerks. Nearly everyone else has no ideas and that's worse. At least apple is bringing something new to the table.
Are you a patent lawyer or patent clerk? Why do you base your judgment on this if you're not? What's the legal precedent?
Besides, Sammy is fucked. Their internal communications basically said, "copy the iPhone. Now. Before we become irrelevant.". That's fucking damning.
Because not everything you learn should relate to business or your job after school.
Education should be about exposure to a lot more than just work. Opening your eyes to new experiences, new information and understandings of the universe and the humanity around you should be priority one.
I mean, I've never had the urge to shoot my best friend and save him from a lynch mob after he got into some trouble with the locals. So why should I have to read Of Mice and Men?
The problem isn't that school is hard and we should do away with math. It's that our culture doesn't emphasize knowledge and intelligence isn't respected. There's actually a wave of antiintellectualism that has major states of our nation considering removing key parts of cosmology, biology, geology, etc with NONSENSE.
I don't expect everyone to go into fields they don't want to. If you don't have the heart to go into the arts, then don't. If you were never exposed to the arts, then that means that's another potential artist lost.
Same with maths and sciences. We don't know. It shouldn't be this way, but that's the way it is.
I'm assuming you're running the decryption app on the same device, right? :)
Well when you can run arbitrary apps you can then decrypt the APK then redistribute the DRM free APK.
No bueno. We're still at square one.
I'm shocked Android doesn't already do that.
He's not arguing you don't have the right, he's arguing that making such devices doesn't benefit developers.
Are there even any block buster Android app sales success stories out there?
Maybe there's a middle ground. Apps loaded from the store are ridiculously DRMed but you can sideload too?
"Weâ(TM)re Apple. We donâ(TM)t wear suits. We donâ(TM)t even own suits." - Steve
sure because Samsung has never done anything like this ever before