Reagan, a professional actor, didn't really need to understand the details of politics or government, and never did.
Puh-leeze, are we talking about Ronald Reagan here? The man who saved our country from a horrible economic slump, proposed and actually got passed the largest tax cut in history at the time, and helped end the cold war? Yeah, be must not have known much about politics or government...
Of course, this only works in the short term. Without your staff it will be *much* harder to generate new revenue. And without new revenue it's impossible to hire new staff.
Oh Bullshit, once you start growing again, it is easy to hire new workers....
Why do people get all bent out of shape about stuff like this? This isn't Japan, you have to right to employment for life or anything like that... geezz...
The estimate I heard was about 50 cents a unit. Hell, and I pay the people bitching and moaning about the V-Chip on here 50 cents toward their next TV purchase if they'd shut up about it.
Regardless of that, anything which arbitrarily labels content is censorship. The mere act of labeling something is a very real form of censorship.
Wow, that is prehaps the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Oh my God, look at the card catalog it categories books by category!!! What a horrible form of censorship!!!
This year based numbering scheme is dumb... Wasn't it Microsoft's idea in the first place? They have some good ideas sometimes, especially in the area of marketing, but this one is for the birds. Why emulate it? The only other industry that uses year based systems is the auto industry which is hardly a model for dynamic, forward thinking companies in most cases.
Germany is a democratic country last time I checked. They are more than free to amend their constitution should they desire. Given their past, I don't think that's going to happen, but there you go...
Self-Rating Schemes Will Cause Controversial Speech To Be Censored Self-Rating Is Burdensome, Unwieldy, and Costly Conversation Can't Be Rated Self-Ratings Will Only Encourage, Not Prevent, Government Regulation Self-Ratings Schemes Will Turn the Internet into a Homogenized Medium Dominated by Commercial Speakers
Again, we see the framing of the problem incorrectly. Instead of saying, properly, "Self-Rating Will Allow Users to See what they Wish" they frame this as censorship. This is no more censorship than my choosing not visit foo.com is censorship. How can it be censorship if the information is out there on a web server?
The cost issue is a red herring, what is the cost of rating a web page compared to a server to host the page, and actually production on content? And don't tell me this process can't be largely automated.
Conversation can't be rated. Fine. Don't rate it. There are exemptions for certain types of content in the proposals.
If you waste your time reading the paper linked to above (don't waste your time) you see the argument that somehow this rating system will encourage govt. regulation? What's the argument for this? Nothing. Nada. That's because there's nothing to back it up. Its opinion and an ignorent one at that. The situation in Austrilia is mentioned for some reason, but that has nothing to do with ratings...
Oh, and she finishes up with the mandatory Leftish bash at Capitalism. Yawn.
In the US you have a right to be Black, or not stay home and be barefoot and pregnant. You do not have the right to force me to show your damn movie in my theatre, or force me to advertise it for whatever reason.
I saw the NC-17 version, in a normal chain, I belive it was a Dickinson theatre (of course, as bad as that movie was, maybe they just decided on general principal not to show NC-17 movie becuase they assumed they were awful.)
Most movie chains and many video chains refuse to show NC-17 movies. An NC-17 movie is essentially removed from distribution, just on the basis of a rating. That is censorship.
What, theatre owners aren't allowed to decide what they want to show on their screens? You guys are always free and easy with other's rights....
Think of the NC-17 label. All it's supposed to indicate is fare fit for adults - and since adults are 80% of the population, there ought to be plenty of movies made for them. But since most theaters (over 90%) won't run NC-17 movies, and most newspapers won't carry ads for them, any NC-17 movie is doomed to be a failure.
What, theatres don't have the right to determine which movies they want to show? News papers don't have the right to determine what kind of ads they want to print? This is just typical scare talk from the typical paranoia crowd. I saw Showgirls in the theatre (not that I'm proud of it or anything). If there is a buck to be made, you can bet someone will be there to collect it.
Slashdot Mirror
Reagan, a professional actor, didn't really need to understand the details of politics or government, and never did.
Puh-leeze, are we talking about Ronald Reagan here? The man who saved our country from a horrible economic slump, proposed and actually got passed the largest tax cut in history at the time, and helped end the cold war? Yeah, be must not have known much about politics or government...
Trademarks != Patents
Thanks for playing though...
Here is a good source:
Economic Statistics Briefing Room
So what's your point?
The number of people layed off each week is irrelavant without knowing how many people are hired each week.
Try reading an economics text sometime...
HTH
Of course, this only works in the short term. Without your staff it will be *much* harder to generate new revenue. And without new revenue it's impossible to hire new staff.
Oh Bullshit, once you start growing again, it is easy to hire new workers....
Why do people get all bent out of shape about stuff like this? This isn't Japan, you have to right to employment for life or anything like that... geezz...
If I was in charge of buying computers at a graphics co I would think twice before buying from a company that does this
If you were smart you would worry even more about bying from a company that could cease to exist if they didn't lay off workers.
Heh, I get it for free....
Let's hear a big round of applause for the tragedy of the commons!!!
Yeah, all those people you mentioned originally did all their work for charity... shame, really...
The estimate I heard was about 50 cents a unit. Hell, and I pay the people bitching and moaning about the V-Chip on here 50 cents toward their next TV purchase if they'd shut up about it.
Regardless of that, anything which arbitrarily labels content is censorship. The mere act of labeling something is a very real form of censorship.
Wow, that is prehaps the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Oh my God, look at the card catalog it categories books by category!!! What a horrible form of censorship!!!
Very similar, also involves hitting Reload quite a bit.... Seems confined to the lower life forms though.
This year based numbering scheme is dumb... Wasn't it Microsoft's idea in the first place? They have some good ideas sometimes, especially in the area of marketing, but this one is for the birds. Why emulate it? The only other industry that uses year based systems is the auto industry which is hardly a model for dynamic, forward thinking companies in most cases.
Germany is a democratic country last time I checked. They are more than free to amend their constitution should they desire. Given their past, I don't think that's going to happen, but there you go...
Germany's constitution already forbids the viewing of "hate speech". They don't have a right to see it in the first place.
From the article:
Self-Rating Schemes Will Cause Controversial Speech To Be Censored
Self-Rating Is Burdensome, Unwieldy, and Costly
Conversation Can't Be Rated
Self-Ratings Will Only Encourage, Not Prevent, Government Regulation
Self-Ratings Schemes Will Turn the Internet into a Homogenized Medium Dominated by Commercial Speakers
Again, we see the framing of the problem incorrectly. Instead of saying, properly, "Self-Rating Will Allow Users to See what they Wish" they frame this as censorship. This is no more censorship than my choosing not visit foo.com is censorship. How can it be censorship if the information is out there on a web server?
The cost issue is a red herring, what is the cost of rating a web page compared to a server to host the page, and actually production on content? And don't tell me this process can't be largely automated.
Conversation can't be rated. Fine. Don't rate it. There are exemptions for certain types of content in the proposals.
If you waste your time reading the paper linked to above (don't waste your time) you see the argument that somehow this rating system will encourage govt. regulation? What's the argument for this? Nothing. Nada. That's because there's nothing to back it up. Its opinion and an ignorent one at that. The situation in Austrilia is mentioned for some reason, but that has nothing to do with ratings...
Oh, and she finishes up with the mandatory Leftish bash at Capitalism. Yawn.
Thanks for totally missing the point....
In the US you have a right to be Black, or not stay home and be barefoot and pregnant. You do not have the right to force me to show your damn movie in my theatre, or force me to advertise it for whatever reason.
Good luck with the remedial logic class though...
I saw the NC-17 version, in a normal chain, I belive it was a Dickinson theatre (of course, as bad as that movie was, maybe they just decided on general principal not to show NC-17 movie becuase they assumed they were awful.)
I think theatres that show crappy lowest common denominator films would be better labed as pandering myself....
What, people shouldn't have the right to have closed minds?
When Showgirls came out.
What's wrong with that? I know, God forbid that the community pressure people into not doing things that community at large disapproves of.....
Most movie chains and many video chains refuse to show NC-17 movies. An NC-17 movie is essentially removed from distribution, just on the basis of a rating. That is censorship.
What, theatre owners aren't allowed to decide what they want to show on their screens? You guys are always free and easy with other's rights....
So the people who actually own the property don't have the right to put terms into leases now?
I also think your use of the term "pandering" is kind of insulting. Some people use their right to picket and to free speach and you disapprove?
Think of the NC-17 label. All it's supposed to indicate is fare fit for adults - and since adults are 80% of the population, there ought to be plenty of movies made for them. But since most theaters (over 90%) won't run NC-17 movies, and most newspapers won't carry ads for them, any NC-17 movie is doomed to be a failure.
What, theatres don't have the right to determine which movies they want to show? News papers don't have the right to determine what kind of ads they want to print? This is just typical scare talk from the typical paranoia crowd. I saw Showgirls in the theatre (not that I'm proud of it or anything). If there is a buck to be made, you can bet someone will be there to collect it.
Ratings don't censor anything. Its amazing that people like this use the term censor to mean anything that they are opposed to.