Uh, no. The idiots who flew the planes were nutjobs, but bin Laden had a very specific political goal in mind: he wanted US troops out of Saudi Arabia. Pre-9/11, there were US troops in Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden launches an attack on US soil, we invade Iraq and then remove our troops from Saudi Arabia.
Folks rarely throw their lives away for abstract concepts like "hating our freedoms." bin Laden wanted the US out of SA, most of the hijackers were from SA, and they all got what they wanted. And 10 or 20 years from now when we are attacked by terrorists from Iraq, they won't be here because they hate our freedoms.
There have been plenty of instances where a company dropped their own name in favor of the name they just bought. For example, Nations Banks is now Bank of America. And the name Wells Fargo Bank has survived not one, but two takeovers.
The name or logo of a company of a company can be a very valuable asset. For example, the Wells Fargo Stagecoach is pretty damn powerful icon. It has appeared in tons of movies and even shows up in school books as a part of the old west.
The name Bank of America sounds a hell of a lot better then Nations Bank and came with a lot of great history.
AT&T is still a recognized brand and has a nation appeal that the regional based SBC (Southeren Bell Corp) doesn't have. SBC is a national player and having a national brand like AT&T can't be dismissed.
I wonder if SBC will go back to the AT&T roots, using AT&T at the national level and reviving the old regional bell names for local use. Pacific Bell and Southern Bell were the name used by those local units prior to the AT&T break-up.
IS all that is required for marriage in your mind be that it be to a person you love? Does that mean you should be allowed to marry your dad or your brother because you love him? Your argument that "straights can marry people they love but gays can't" is ludicrous.
And you are being willfuly obtuse. Fine, try this on for size: Straight folks are allowd to marry another consenting adult, as long as it is a non-incestous relationship. Gay folks are denied the same right by hateful bigots.
There's much more to it than that.
Really? Like what?
Also, your Nat'l Geographic link is irrelevant.
Irrelevant? You made the argument that Gays are asking for "extra" rights that are an abomination to the natural order of things. I provided a link demonstrating that homosexuality does occur in nature. Myabe I'm missing something here. Perhaps you can give a explanation of what you mean by "natural order of things."
We are talking about people not animals. (There are differences between the two, dontcha know!)
Last time I checked people are animails. You know, hairless apes with big brains who walk upright. Wasn't this covered in your high school biology class?
If National Geographic reported that incest was "not unknown" in the animal kingdom, would you support that as well? Again, you have made another ridiculous argument.
Are you honestly suggesting that homosexuality and incest are the same?
This is not at all the same thing. Gays have the same rights as straight people. Anyone, gay or straight, has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. Nobody, gay or straight, has the right to marry someone of the same sex. Gays are asking for "extra" rights. ..
Um, no. Straights have the right to marry the person they love. Gays do not. All gay folk want -- and deserve, and will finaly get -- is the same rights that straights have.
Gays are asking for "extra" rights that are an abomination to the natural order of things.
"But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom."
Or are you going to find those spaces where outsourcing won't or can't go and pursue ruthlessly?
Alright Slick. I'm on board with you. I'll stop my whining. So tell: were are these jobs that can't be outsourced?
What is the magic job that will accomodate the 3 million jobs lost since Bush entered the White House? What job will accomodate the 150,000 new workers who enter the workforce every month? What job will accomodate the millions who will continue to lose their jobs because of outsourcing?
Before you answer, consider this: unless a job requires both the customer and the service provider to be located in the United States, it can be moved to another country.
So put your money where your mouth is: where are the fucking jobs going to be?
Well then the question is, what are you complaining about? All these products are made outside US, but America still makes money off them, which should be a good thing for US, right?
Wrong. A US based corporation may or may not make a huge profit off of this situation, but the US as a whole derives very little benefit.
Take the computer made in China: the bulk of the revenue generated by the purchase of that computer stays in China: labor and taxes, as well as the benefits for the local executives. The bulk of the money that is allowed into the United States* is spread among a small number of executives, with a small portion becoming profits. And -- thanks to Glorious Leader -- the tax burden on executives and corporations is so low that US Government sees almost nothing from this offshore work.
So, how exactly does the US make money off of this?
thx, Eric
* Not all of the profit made in foreign nations ever makes it back to the United States. The money may be shifted around amongest foreigh own subsids to avoid taxes. Also, some foreign nations restrict the flow of capital out of their borders.
Depends on how you define successful. I'd be happy to take a 10% cut in pay if I could work 10% fewer hours and still be able to afford medical insurance.
Successful? There are lots of Americans who work 40 hours a week, but are still unable to provide for all of their family's basic needs.
So I ask, howis the US more successful then the EU?
Forest for the trees, kids. Yes, your medical records may be over seas, but that is the small prize. Financial services companies have off-shored a lot of work to India, work that involves financial records. Think about: your name, address, social security number and account information may be sitting in India as I type this.
Someone in another posting made a joke about extortion being cheaper becaue of reduced labor costs. Not much of a joke, really. Someone based in the US will most likely turn down an offer of US$5,000 for complete information -- including SS# -- for accounts with at least US$1 million in net assets. But that US$5,000 looks very attractive to a person based in India, a country where the average annual income is US$4,000, and US$30,000 is salary for a top notch programer.
Or the reason that no one from Enron has been tried is because of their close relationship with BushCo.
Re:I call bullshit -- Re:As /. has clearly shown
on
The "Techie" Vote?
·
· Score: 1
Besides, as/. has also clearly shown, on the balance geeks tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative -- with a wide streak of 'leave me the hell alone' onryness. Generally that would describe a Libertarian, except that I think most of us consider the Libertarians idiots who we would rather not associate with.
Um, no. I think that slashdot has shown that the balance of geeks who post on slashdot tend toward the Libertarian. However, out in the real world there are plenty of geeks who are very happy to descirbe their politices as progressive.
Even among slashdotters, there is plenty of difference of opinion on non-technical issues. For example, there have been plenty of arguments about the illegal invasion and brutal occupation of Iraq. We have had lots of heavy debate about the place of unions in the United States. There have been rather heated discusions about the ridiculous tax cuts that the rich have recived as a part of Bush's class war.
Hell, there isn't even agreement on a geek specific issue like outsourcing, with some of us taking a view that goverenment action is needed to protect US jobs, while others take a "I've got mine, go fuck yourself" attitude.
I recoginize that the above statements are inflamatory, and may very well provoke off-topic debate. But that only proves a point: beyond a few key issues, there is very little unity of geek view. While this may be enough to fund a single issue group like the EFF, it is not enough to form a broad based political movement like the Christian Right.
So what is to keep us from building a geek political coalition around these shared values, while ignoring or compromising on the differences? In many ways existing organizations like the EFF are already doing this. And that is certainly no different than the 'police unions, the AFL-CIO, and the Christian Right' you mention. Do you think they started out as monolithic political blocks? Do you think they really are such now, even if their dollars end up lobbying on single issues?
Absolutely. The Christian Right starts out with a common world view grounded in their religous text. Even without leadership, there are millions of voters who would vote for any candidate that bases their platform on the Bible. All the leadership of the Christian Right does is provide a bit of organizational focus.
And that is the big difference between the Christian Right and the Geeks: one group will vote as a block and the other won't. Which is easier to identify for the 2004 presidential election: the ideal candidate for the Christian Right, or the ideal candidate for the Geek Nation.
I wouldn't expect the French to step up and defend anything.
That's funny. I like how you tie a company to its home country. Let's try this one for SCO:
SCO's actions have no legal basis and little worldwide support; they are destructive and are ruining a once great reputation; and in the long rn, they are doomed to failure.
I was talking to my boss about putting a linux file server in here, and was making decent headway recently. Now, somehow he heard of this SCO BS, and hes got cold(er) feet. My angle was the cost savings, but now thats gone, so no linux here for a while...
Tell your boss to watch the Fortune 500 companies that have already commited to Linux. These are companies that have full time legal staff who have -- I'm sure -- been watching these events unfold with a very careful eye.
Until the big boys flinch, I see nothing to worry about here.
Why the hell is this considered "informative?" Do you have anything insightful to back up this assinine statement? Or were just happy to take an opprotunity to unthinkingly bash unions?
1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism. 2. A reactionary or dictatorial person.
fascism
1. often Fascism
1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.
-----
How does owning one of these devices -- assuming they were an actual product -- make one a fascist? A tool that enables the individual consumer to make informed choices about the products they buy is a great thing to fight fascism.
I figure that "getting prepared" means to intentionaly forget personal hygene items in deferrence to as much gold and silver glitter as you can, and articles of clothing that are able to be removed under 2 seconds.
No, getting prepared means food, water, clothing, camping gear. And there are many folks who go to BM and keep their clothes on the whole time.
Sorry, folks - but TBM reminds me too much of Sodom & Gommorah; pleasure for the sake of pleasure and self-gratification.
And what is wrong with that? Do you go thorugh life without taking steps to add joy to your days? Are all your activties for the sake of others?
Instead of doing something onanistic, how about spending that time helping-out in homeless shelters or food programs for the homeless? Do something that actually BENEFITS another human being than indulging in the self-gratifying mind-orgy that TBM is.
Doing something for one's own self does not preclude one from help others as well. Unless you have foresaken all personal pleasure, you don't have a right to condem others, particulary when they harm none.
If the geek in question is at all interested in military history, the Marin headlands were used for gunnery emplacements from the Spanish-American War through WW2, through to a restored Nike missile base from the Cold War.
There is also Fort Point (www.nps.gov/fopo/), at the foot foot of the San Francisco side of the GGB.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, no. The idiots who flew the planes were nutjobs, but bin Laden had a very specific political goal in mind: he wanted US troops out of Saudi Arabia. Pre-9/11, there were US troops in Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden launches an attack on US soil, we invade Iraq and then remove our troops from Saudi Arabia.
Folks rarely throw their lives away for abstract concepts like "hating our freedoms." bin Laden wanted the US out of SA, most of the hijackers were from SA, and they all got what they wanted. And 10 or 20 years from now when we are attacked by terrorists from Iraq, they won't be here because they hate our freedoms.
There have been plenty of instances where a company dropped their own name in favor of the name they just bought. For example, Nations Banks is now Bank of America. And the name Wells Fargo Bank has survived not one, but two takeovers.
.
The name or logo of a company of a company can be a very valuable asset. For example, the Wells Fargo Stagecoach is pretty damn powerful icon. It has appeared in tons of movies and even shows up in school books as a part of the old west.
The name Bank of America sounds a hell of a lot better then Nations Bank and came with a lot of great history.
AT&T is still a recognized brand and has a nation appeal that the regional based SBC (Southeren Bell Corp) doesn't have. SBC is a national player and having a national brand like AT&T can't be dismissed.
I wonder if SBC will go back to the AT&T roots, using AT&T at the national level and reviving the old regional bell names for local use. Pacific Bell and Southern Bell were the name used by those local units prior to the AT&T break-up.
The more things change. .
thx,
Eric
IS all that is required for marriage in your mind be that it be to a person you love? Does that mean you should be allowed to marry your dad or your brother because you love him? Your argument that "straights can marry people they love but gays can't" is ludicrous.
And you are being willfuly obtuse. Fine, try this on for size: Straight folks are allowd to marry another consenting adult, as long as it is a non-incestous relationship. Gay folks are denied the same right by hateful bigots.
There's much more to it than that.
Really? Like what?
Also, your Nat'l Geographic link is irrelevant.
Irrelevant? You made the argument that Gays are asking for "extra" rights that are an abomination to the natural order of things. I provided a link demonstrating that homosexuality does occur in nature. Myabe I'm missing something here. Perhaps you can give a explanation of what you mean by "natural order of things."We are talking about people not animals. (There are differences between the two, dontcha know!)
Last time I checked people are animails. You know, hairless apes with big brains who walk upright. Wasn't this covered in your high school biology class?
If National Geographic reported that incest was "not unknown" in the animal kingdom, would you support that as well? Again, you have made another ridiculous argument.
Are you honestly suggesting that homosexuality and incest are the same?
thx,
Eric
This is not at all the same thing. Gays have the same rights as straight people. Anyone, gay or straight, has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. Nobody, gay or straight, has the right to marry someone of the same sex. Gays are asking for "extra" rights. . .
Um, no. Straights have the right to marry the person they love. Gays do not. All gay folk want -- and deserve, and will finaly get -- is the same rights that straights have.
Gays are asking for "extra" rights that are an abomination to the natural order of things.
You think so? Check out this article from the National Geographic:
"But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom."
thx,
Eric
I will boycott a business if I suspect it makes donations to the GOP (Domino's, for example). This makes it eaiser to target my boycotts.
thx,
Eric
Become a Java GURU. You will be employed and survive.
This doesn't answer my question. Or do you think 3 million Java Guru jobs will be created before the end of this year?
Besides, how does one become a Java Guru if all the entry level jobs are overseas? And wouldn't it be cheaper to hire a guru based in India?
thx,
Eric
Or are you going to find those spaces where outsourcing won't or can't go and pursue ruthlessly?
Alright Slick. I'm on board with you. I'll stop my whining. So tell: were are these jobs that can't be outsourced?
What is the magic job that will accomodate the 3 million jobs lost since Bush entered the White House? What job will accomodate the 150,000 new workers who enter the workforce every month? What job will accomodate the millions who will continue to lose their jobs because of outsourcing?
Before you answer, consider this: unless a job requires both the customer and the service provider to be located in the United States, it can be moved to another country.
So put your money where your mouth is: where are the fucking jobs going to be?
thx,
Eric
Well then the question is, what are you complaining about? All these products are made outside US, but America still makes money off them, which should be a good thing for US, right?
Wrong. A US based corporation may or may not make a huge profit off of this situation, but the US as a whole derives very little benefit.
Take the computer made in China: the bulk of the revenue generated by the purchase of that computer stays in China: labor and taxes, as well as the benefits for the local executives. The bulk of the money that is allowed into the United States* is spread among a small number of executives, with a small portion becoming profits. And -- thanks to Glorious Leader -- the tax burden on executives and corporations is so low that US Government sees almost nothing from this offshore work.
So, how exactly does the US make money off of this?
thx,
Eric
* Not all of the profit made in foreign nations ever makes it back to the United States. The money may be shifted around amongest foreigh own subsids to avoid taxes. Also, some foreign nations restrict the flow of capital out of their borders.
-e
Free trade does work out well, but the problem is that it does involve both winners and losers, in the short term.
And the short term is all that matters. To quote Keynes: In the long-term, we're all dead.
thx,
Eric
As events in Iraq are demonstrating. . .
thx,
Eric
I can't believe that this off-topic bullshit got moded up. But what the hell; I've got the mod points to burn in responding.
If the Republicans had Americans as their priority, then US Soldiers wouldn't be dying in Iraq for the sake of Haliburton and Bechtel profits.
thx,
Eric
Depends on how you define successful. I'd be happy to take a 10% cut in pay if I could work 10% fewer hours and still be able to afford medical insurance.
Successful? There are lots of Americans who work 40 hours a week, but are still unable to provide for all of their family's basic needs.
So I ask, howis the US more successful then the EU?
thx,
Eric
Forest for the trees, kids. Yes, your medical records may be over seas, but that is the small prize. Financial services companies have off-shored a lot of work to India, work that involves financial records. Think about: your name, address, social security number and account information may be sitting in India as I type this.
Someone in another posting made a joke about extortion being cheaper becaue of reduced labor costs. Not much of a joke, really. Someone based in the US will most likely turn down an offer of US$5,000 for complete information -- including SS# -- for accounts with at least US$1 million in net assets. But that US$5,000 looks very attractive to a person based in India, a country where the average annual income is US$4,000, and US$30,000 is salary for a top notch programer.
It is only a matter of time.
thx,
Eric
Or the reason that no one from Enron has been tried is because of their close relationship with BushCo.
Besides, as /. has also clearly shown, on the balance geeks tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative -- with a wide streak of 'leave me the hell alone' onryness. Generally that would describe a Libertarian, except that I think most of us consider the Libertarians idiots who we would rather not associate with.
Um, no. I think that slashdot has shown that the balance of geeks who post on slashdot tend toward the Libertarian. However, out in the real world there are plenty of geeks who are very happy to descirbe their politices as progressive.
Even among slashdotters, there is plenty of difference of opinion on non-technical issues. For example, there have been plenty of arguments about the illegal invasion and brutal occupation of Iraq. We have had lots of heavy debate about the place of unions in the United States. There have been rather heated discusions about the ridiculous tax cuts that the rich have recived as a part of Bush's class war.
Hell, there isn't even agreement on a geek specific issue like outsourcing, with some of us taking a view that goverenment action is needed to protect US jobs, while others take a "I've got mine, go fuck yourself" attitude.
I recoginize that the above statements are inflamatory, and may very well provoke off-topic debate. But that only proves a point: beyond a few key issues, there is very little unity of geek view. While this may be enough to fund a single issue group like the EFF, it is not enough to form a broad based political movement like the Christian Right.
So what is to keep us from building a geek political coalition around these shared values, while ignoring or compromising on the differences? In many ways existing organizations like the EFF are already doing this. And that is certainly no different than the 'police unions, the AFL-CIO, and the Christian Right' you mention. Do you think they started out as monolithic political blocks? Do you think they really are such now, even if their dollars end up lobbying on single issues?
Absolutely. The Christian Right starts out with a common world view grounded in their religous text. Even without leadership, there are millions of voters who would vote for any candidate that bases their platform on the Bible. All the leadership of the Christian Right does is provide a bit of organizational focus.
And that is the big difference between the Christian Right and the Geeks: one group will vote as a block and the other won't. Which is easier to identify for the 2004 presidential election: the ideal candidate for the Christian Right, or the ideal candidate for the Geek Nation.
thx,
eric
Bigby wrote:
...
> > I assume Mandrake
I wouldn't expect the French to step up and defend anything.
That's funny. I like how you tie a company to its home country. Let's try this one for SCO:
SCO's actions have no legal basis and little worldwide support; they are destructive and are ruining a once great reputation; and in the long rn, they are doomed to failure.
thx,
eric
I was talking to my boss about putting a linux file server in here, and was making decent headway recently. Now, somehow he heard of this SCO BS, and hes got cold(er) feet. My angle was the cost savings, but now thats gone, so no linux here for a while...
Tell your boss to watch the Fortune 500 companies that have already commited to Linux. These are companies that have full time legal staff who have -- I'm sure -- been watching these events unfold with a very careful eye.
Until the big boys flinch, I see nothing to worry about here.
thx,
eric
Two words; labor union!
Why the hell is this considered "informative?" Do you have anything insightful to back up this assinine statement? Or were just happy to take an opprotunity to unthinkingly bash unions?
Seems to me, that this is a Facist detector.
If you own one, you are probably a Facist.
Seems to me you need to buy a dictionary:
-----
fascist:
1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.
2. A reactionary or dictatorial person.
fascism
1. often Fascism
1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.
-----
How does owning one of these devices -- assuming they were an actual product -- make one a fascist? A tool that enables the individual consumer to make informed choices about the products they buy is a great thing to fight fascism.
Have you actualy gone, or are you just make random statements to fit your world view?
I figure that "getting prepared" means to intentionaly forget personal hygene items in deferrence to as much gold and silver glitter as you can, and articles of clothing that are able to be removed under 2 seconds.
No, getting prepared means food, water, clothing, camping gear. And there are many folks who go to BM and keep their clothes on the whole time.
Sorry, folks - but TBM reminds me too much of Sodom & Gommorah; pleasure for the sake of pleasure and self-gratification.
And what is wrong with that? Do you go thorugh life without taking steps to add joy to your days? Are all your activties for the sake of others?
Instead of doing something onanistic, how about spending that time helping-out in homeless shelters or food programs for the homeless? Do something that actually BENEFITS another human being than indulging in the self-gratifying mind-orgy that TBM is.
Doing something for one's own self does not preclude one from help others as well. Unless you have foresaken all personal pleasure, you don't have a right to condem others, particulary when they harm none.
thx,
eric
Yow! What camp? I'm at camp bayou.
Between the suburban sprawl that has claimed the entire peninsula, to the brown air that makes me think I should take up smoking to improve my health.
The air in SF isn't bad at all; the wind of the Pacific blows all the nasty smog across the Bay.
The air in Oakland -- which lies across the Bay from SF -- is shit. Much worse then you would expect for a city of that szie.
thx,
eric
If the geek in question is at all interested in military history, the Marin headlands were used for gunnery emplacements from the Spanish-American War through WW2, through to a restored Nike missile base from the Cold War.
There is also Fort Point (www.nps.gov/fopo/), at the foot foot of the San Francisco side of the GGB.
Not sure about that movie, but it was in THX 1138.
Much of THX 1138 was filmed in the BART system, which was under construction at the time the movie was made.