People don't surrender their rights by associating with others. A group of one hundred people is one hundred individuals with a set of rights. Should they choose to express one of those rights in unison, via the group, it does not change the fact that they are still individuals expressing their rights. The ability to do so is a right guaranteed by the 1st Amendment.
Woah, hold on. Corporations are just groups of people that work together. You can't deny one a particular right without denying it to all the people who comprise it.
Does the Party think the Chinese people can't tell the difference between factual claims and the opinions of a seller?
Hmm. Now that I think about it, the Party has been training the people to accept its claims as fact for decades. Maybe they are worried it worked too well.
both nations' attitudes towards government control of information (a.k.a. censorship) and activity monitoring (a.k.a. spying). Working with China means accessing Chinese expertise in controlling access to information and restricting communication. And of course they're both highly corrupt pseudo-communist states, so they have that in common too.
It seems likely that at some point whatever laws and treaties nations establish regarding off-world matters would come into conflict with the realities of living and working off-world. Probably around the time off-worlders realize Earth-bound authorities don't actually have any power over them.
I'm kinda impressed. On one hand, the kid is getting some intense positive reinforcement. On the other, the officials who screwed him are shamed without anyone having to say a single negative thing about them.
Have you read Hobbes? Locke? Rousseau? Kant? Your questions were answered centuries ago. I have neither the time nor the patience to educate you in Classic Liberal political theory and philosophy.
Slashdot Mirror
https://freedomhouse.org/repor...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
etc.
That's still denying three individuals their Constitutionally guaranteed rights. Including their right to free association.
People don't surrender their rights by associating with others. A group of one hundred people is one hundred individuals with a set of rights. Should they choose to express one of those rights in unison, via the group, it does not change the fact that they are still individuals expressing their rights. The ability to do so is a right guaranteed by the 1st Amendment.
Woah, hold on. Corporations are just groups of people that work together. You can't deny one a particular right without denying it to all the people who comprise it.
...What?
+100 for referencing Calvinball.
Hmm. Now that I think about it, the Party has been training the people to accept its claims as fact for decades. Maybe they are worried it worked too well.
both nations' attitudes towards government control of information (a.k.a. censorship) and activity monitoring (a.k.a. spying). Working with China means accessing Chinese expertise in controlling access to information and restricting communication. And of course they're both highly corrupt pseudo-communist states, so they have that in common too.
for which VW is facing civil and criminal charges.
That seems almost as ridiculous a waste of time as all the "wipe the drive and install linux. Derp!" crap.
It seems likely that at some point whatever laws and treaties nations establish regarding off-world matters would come into conflict with the realities of living and working off-world. Probably around the time off-worlders realize Earth-bound authorities don't actually have any power over them.
Where I can take all the tiger-selfies I want!
I'm kinda impressed. On one hand, the kid is getting some intense positive reinforcement. On the other, the officials who screwed him are shamed without anyone having to say a single negative thing about them.
Though I'm told staying up half the night reading Analog and not having my eyes equidistant from the pages is what doomed them.
We should also probably steal theirs so we have an idea who China might be going after.
Oh, I hadn't considered it from the 'de-objectification of machines' direction. Very interesting!
instead of women?
Gasp! Did you never see "I Dated A Robot" in health class?
Should they be punished for having iTunes, iCloud, and all that other crap I can't remove on their phones? Why just Google?
So, the problem is that Uber gives users too much freedom?
Whether or not this move means they changed it to opt-out, it was expressly opt-in during the reported time frame.
That is incorrect. Different categories of employment are treated differently.
Have you read Hobbes? Locke? Rousseau? Kant? Your questions were answered centuries ago. I have neither the time nor the patience to educate you in Classic Liberal political theory and philosophy.
Are most of the drivers using it like that?
It's not disingenuous. They built what they built. It's theirs, they decide how it works.
It is a ride share app, it was always a ride share app, and what investors have done is agree that a ride share app is indeed worth $50B.
Don't forget that they are part of "We".