While working as advertising manager for a college newspaper, I received a phone call from the office of Stan Durwood, who built AMC Theatres into the dominant entertainment force it is now. He was calling to tell me that because of an article we ran which was analyzing AMC's questionable funding of our university's sports endeavors, he would pull all advertising from our paper. Here was a classic case of top-down-authority scolding bottom-up-authority, and here was the result:
1. We lost a little advertising, a small dent in the tens of thousands that came in from elsewhere.
2. The editors promptly knew that we were onto a real story, for once, and pursued it further.
3. AMC have the rest of my life to put up with me telling this story when it becomes relevant.
4. It polarized the entire newspaper, having the exact opposite effect they sought, which was a threat to silence us.
5. Shooting themselves in the foot, AMC lost what they were seeking when they sought our audience for advertisement in the first place.
Pondering what they were doing, I knew that in order for this conflict of interest/ethical breach to come at us from AMC, the whole company had to be pretty entrenched in it. Things like this are not the whims of a single Napoleonic complex--they are cultivated over time in a corporate "We're the most powerful thing on earth" environment. Fortunately, newspapers don't have that luxury, and take the brunt of this kind of pressure: Newspapers rely on reputation and credibility more than any corporation, and know it. Money is secondary to a decent editor, principles being first. Media cannot buckle to conflicts of interest which might seem commonplace to their advertisers, or they will dwindle into fluffy bundles of advertising. The better writers will move elsewhere, because they gots egos as big as China. I am sure AMC applied the same pressure to other advertising outlets, like the big city newspaper. Happens all the time, but the best newspapers (or websites) laugh at it. -Water Paradox
Please read the original before a hundred people misquote it. Why aren't moderators catching this? The fact is that Amazon admits to mispricing on a small number of their total 4.7 million prices. Sounds fair to me, given the fact that anyone who is selling that many things is never going to get my business because the threshhold for decent human interactions decreases dramatically after 1.2 million items sold...:-)
Also, the point that Amazon is probably not scamming, that they have the right to set whatever price they want--it is us who choose whether to buy--is valid. The original fact is useful, but is not itself an indicator of whether Amazon is evil and tyrannical like, say, MicroSoft or WalMart which use their power to buy competition outright to define the market, that being a whole 'nuther issue.
Ever since I first heard about viruses in elementary school 20 years ago, how they're dead and yet reproduce, I figured they were leftover remnants of some ancient technology, like something created by the Egyptians during their pyramid-designing years 10,000 years ago. Now look! We have the ability to manufacture them as well. Don't think it won't happen, either: we already have inferior biological weapons in stockpiles bigger than Rhode Island, I saw some once driving through Montana, a vast valley full of small bunkers full of biological weapons, separated into caches so they're less dangerous...
Anyway the point is, we have the ability to create biological viruses with nanotechnology, and someone will do it. Perhaps the next war will not be in outer space, but in little microships zooming around in a human body.
But we... are able to work our which of the world's "one true" religions is the real one?
Not at all; Christianity is the only one I know of which admits that fact baldly, requiring the grace of God to intervene in our behalf, which Kierkegaard called a leap of faith. God gives us that faith.
I think it's time some people grew a spine, faced the fact that there is no god and got on with their lives with their faces out of the dirt.
Having been both, I find that it requires more spine to believe in God than to accept the easy way out, that there is none. True Christianity is more difficult than anything on earth, for it requires real prayer, which by definition is the most difficult thing a human being can set himself to.
Gen3:22, where God sees that we, knowing good from evil, must be careful not to get eternal life, doesn't clearly indicate that, knowing Good from Evil, we choose the latter consistently. That's what the subsequent 65 books reveal.
It depends on _how_ you don't sign it. If you are normal, or don't care about the consequences, you are right. But what if you quit your job and start picketing the company, drawing media attention, and starting a minor revolution or contributing to the greater one? Someone's gotta do it.
-Water Paradox
Faith. Asking the imaginary sky-spirit won't get you anywhere. Asking God will. But you can't do it on your terms--that's why you have failed in the past, as Isaiah 58 clarifies.
Asking people for help on simple issues like tying shoes or pissing, that's fine. But ask a person a serious moral issue, and you'll get nowhere, just a lot of opinions, because we humans are manipulative, stupid, shortsighted, and with no innate sense of morals. God and the angels offer help on the big issues, if you take that leap of faith. If you do not take that leap of faith, yes, you are spineless, but don't hold me to those words because I ain't your judge--just a dude offering an opinion.
The reason asking other people for help is simpering is because you're submitting your authority to theirs. They're your equals, not your superiors. God, on the other hand, is not, but he is nice about being your superior, waiting until you notice the fact.
No joke. God has time to wait. He don't care what you think unless you ask him to, or you start oppressing other people.
If it is a minor patent and the company is just
being careful, then fret not and sign. But if
you are fretting enough to post to Slashdot,
asking for a recommendation, I'd refer you to
the Old Testament, where every time David found
himself in a situation like this, he turned to
prayer. God answered his prayers, and he did
what he did knowing that God was behind him.
Prayer works--you might need to take more time
than you are used to waiting for an answer, but
it's worth the wait. To actually answer your
question here just leaves you a simpering idiot
who has no spine, relying on others to make your
decisions. You have to stand up someday, so
why not when you've got a patent pending with
your name attached? Why attach your name to
something which is going to get its butt kicked
by the spirit of Open Source, which is cleaner
than stinky ol' protectionism and will event'lly
prevail even if it takes a thousand years? Think
long thoughts, which prayer cultivates.
Slashdot Mirror
1. We lost a little advertising, a small dent in the tens of thousands that came in from elsewhere.
2. The editors promptly knew that we were onto a real story, for once, and pursued it further.
3. AMC have the rest of my life to put up with me telling this story when it becomes relevant.
4. It polarized the entire newspaper, having the exact opposite effect they sought, which was a threat to silence us.
5. Shooting themselves in the foot, AMC lost what they were seeking when they sought our audience for advertisement in the first place.
Pondering what they were doing, I knew that in order for this conflict of interest/ethical breach to come at us from AMC, the whole company had to be pretty entrenched in it. Things like this are not the whims of a single Napoleonic complex--they are cultivated over time in a corporate "We're the most powerful thing on earth" environment. Fortunately, newspapers don't have that luxury, and take the brunt of this kind of pressure: Newspapers rely on reputation and credibility more than any corporation, and know it. Money is secondary to a decent editor, principles being first. Media cannot buckle to conflicts of interest which might seem commonplace to their advertisers, or they will dwindle into fluffy bundles of advertising. The better writers will move elsewhere, because they gots egos as big as China. I am sure AMC applied the same pressure to other advertising outlets, like the big city newspaper. Happens all the time, but the best newspapers (or websites) laugh at it. -Water Paradox
Also, the point that Amazon is probably not scamming, that they have the right to set whatever price they want--it is us who choose whether to buy--is valid. The original fact is useful, but is not itself an indicator of whether Amazon is evil and tyrannical like, say, MicroSoft or WalMart which use their power to buy competition outright to define the market, that being a whole 'nuther issue.
-Water Paradox
Anyway the point is, we have the ability to create biological viruses with nanotechnology, and someone will do it. Perhaps the next war will not be in outer space, but in little microships zooming around in a human body.
-Water Paradox
Not at all; Christianity is the only one I know of which admits that fact baldly, requiring the grace of God to intervene in our behalf, which Kierkegaard called a leap of faith. God gives us that faith.
I think it's time some people grew a spine, faced the fact that there is no god and got on with their lives with their faces out of the dirt.
Having been both, I find that it requires more spine to believe in God than to accept the easy way out, that there is none. True Christianity is more difficult than anything on earth, for it requires real prayer, which by definition is the most difficult thing a human being can set himself to.
Gen3:22, where God sees that we, knowing good from evil, must be careful not to get eternal life, doesn't clearly indicate that, knowing Good from Evil, we choose the latter consistently. That's what the subsequent 65 books reveal.
-Water Paradox
It depends on _how_ you don't sign it. If you are normal, or don't care about the consequences, you are right. But what if you quit your job and start picketing the company, drawing media attention, and starting a minor revolution or contributing to the greater one? Someone's gotta do it. -Water Paradox
Asking people for help on simple issues like tying shoes or pissing, that's fine. But ask a person a serious moral issue, and you'll get nowhere, just a lot of opinions, because we humans are manipulative, stupid, shortsighted, and with no innate sense of morals. God and the angels offer help on the big issues, if you take that leap of faith. If you do not take that leap of faith, yes, you are spineless, but don't hold me to those words because I ain't your judge--just a dude offering an opinion.
The reason asking other people for help is simpering is because you're submitting your authority to theirs. They're your equals, not your superiors. God, on the other hand, is not, but he is nice about being your superior, waiting until you notice the fact.
No joke. God has time to wait. He don't care what you think unless you ask him to, or you start oppressing other people.
-Water Paradox
If it is a minor patent and the company is just being careful, then fret not and sign. But if you are fretting enough to post to Slashdot, asking for a recommendation, I'd refer you to the Old Testament, where every time David found himself in a situation like this, he turned to prayer. God answered his prayers, and he did what he did knowing that God was behind him. Prayer works--you might need to take more time than you are used to waiting for an answer, but it's worth the wait. To actually answer your question here just leaves you a simpering idiot who has no spine, relying on others to make your decisions. You have to stand up someday, so why not when you've got a patent pending with your name attached? Why attach your name to something which is going to get its butt kicked by the spirit of Open Source, which is cleaner than stinky ol' protectionism and will event'lly prevail even if it takes a thousand years? Think long thoughts, which prayer cultivates.