I'm fully aware of the Supreme Court's recent rulings equating unlimited campaign spending with free speech. I disagree with their reasoning. Other democracies limit both overall campaign spending as well as the length of election campaigns, and those democracies function quite well. When the Court says, "This is because virtually every means of communicating ideas in today's mass society requires the expenditure of money," it ignores obvious alternative methods of mass communication. In the U.S., for example, we have public broadcasting networks in both radio and TV that could be used to give every candidate ample and equal opportunities to reach the public. The Court citing "free speech" as if it always triumphs every other consideration ignores the fact that our society and our courts often limit the free speech of individuals when not doing so would cause harm to other individuals or to society as a whole. Aside from that, I do not agree that campaign spending equals free speech.
It comes down to whether or not we believe unlimited campaign spending distorts and corrupts the political process. I believe the evidence is that it clearly does, and I believe that issues like net neutrality illustrate that. Many of the representatives who signed Letter 2 that was referenced in the Ars Technica article represent areas where Internet access is very limited. They are betting that since so many of their constitutents don't have home Internet access, most of them won't even notice their actions on net neutrality or even know what it is. In fact, I doubt most of those representatives could explain net neutrality if asked. They got contributions and signed the letter they were asked to sign because that's how the campaign funding business works.
While it may be legal for a representative to vote a certain way, if they're voting that way because they're getting a payoff to vote that way, it's a bribe in my book. Calling it a campaign contribution is just semantics. Our system of unlimited spending on political campaigns enhances the likelihood that votes on issues such as net neutrality will go the way the highest bidders want it to go.
So if I'm a certified public accountant whose job depends on me taking classes every two years to remain certified and someone gives me cash to spend any way I want to fudge their books, it's a bribe; but if they pay for my classes and recertification to fudge their books, it's not a bribe? Sorry, I'm not seeing the distinction there.
Actually they are placing a $600 bet that they'll get a product in return that will be the envy of all their friends and will also be a really nice smartphone that's also a really nice full-fledged computer. People place bets much larger than that thousands of times a day in Vegas, where the odds that they'll win aren't nearly so good. Heck, people place bets much larger than that thousands of times a day on all kinds of investment opportunities. It's their $600 and they're taking a chance with it. There's nothing new at all about people spending their money that way.
Yes, unbelievable, isn't it? It's like when I went online to order a new laptop a few weeks ago - the private, for-profit company there also asked me for money. The nerve.
From "A Reporter's Notebook" Portsmouth, N.H., 1900:
"As 1900 dawns, the Seacoast faces a shocking new technology. Is electricity safe? Is it just another toy for the rich? Do we really need it when gas lights work just fine and horses are easier to ride than cars? Should we develop this new science or leave the genie in the bulb?... A few automobiles have already made their way through our fair city, lured by the nearby sandy beaches, fine hotels, Revolutionary history and panoramic scenery. Hoards more of them cannot be far off, their engines fouling our already gritty air, their horns blaring as they compete for their share of the muddy downtown streets with the trolleys and the horse carts... Thankfully there is legislation planned that will require all motorcars to be proceeded by a man on foot waving a warning flag. This is certainly a commendable safety measure and should be supported."
"Now, good luck getting the VA to allow us to implement it."
I get what you are saying, but taking the time and making the effort to overcome that kind of thing is why undertaking this kind of work is more difficult than just creating apps. And that's why, I think, she says that our best minds are being wasted when they could be put to work addressing issues like that.
If you read her opinion about government in the article and her bio (and the author is a woman), you'll see she is a conservative, and what she's arguing is precisely that people need to take more personal responsibility for their country's pressing problems and quit blissfully ignoring them. And, no, the problems are very complex - if they were simple, you wouldn't need bright minds to take them on.
I think her point is exactly that these are problems that are "social and political in nature," and that our brightest minds are mostly writing inane apps instead of tackling them. Software solutions would help solve many of them but, as she says, doing that work is hard and doesn't offer much of an opportunity to strike it rich.
Except that moving inward from the sea, for many people, will mean that their country will no longer exist. And resolving the causes of climate change requires improving technology, not limiting growth.
Well, I know that about a year from now MS will stop providing security and software updates for XP. And I know that just putting XP ($46), MS Office ($150) and anti-virus software ($44) on an old computer will cost $240. And that's if you don't want a decent graphics editor or things like publishing software, which will cost you more. Not really a "free" donation then, is it? It's like giving someone a car that's going to immediately cost them a bunch of money for repairs and insurance and then will quit running entirely in the near future and won't be resellable for anything but scrap. Um, no thanks.
Ah, another AC who feels a compulsion to comment despite an obvious lack of knowledge.
"Say whatever you want about Windows and security?"
OK, using an old obsolete OS like XP will give you a crippled computer that won't work very well, will rapidly become even more useless, and will likely result in any data you put on it ending up lost or corrupted. And it will cost you a small fortune to buy all the software you'll need to make your "free" donated computer usable. I'm not a geek, but I've used only Linux for years, exchange documents and files with Mac and Windows users constantly, haven't had anything "break," don't worry about security and viruses, and enjoy regularly updated software. Oh, and it's cost me nothing.
That's not really true. In Illinois' case there is a pension problem because for the past 20 years state government, under both Democratic and Republican governors, has balanced the budget by repeatedly deferring annual payments into the pension funds. So while they've collected money from employees for pensions, they've used much of it instead to pay general operating costs and keep taxes down (the state only has a 3-percent income tax). They've also refused to make local school systems contribute anything to fund their pensions - instead the state funds those 100-percent, even though it's the local school boards who decide how much their pensions are. That's been done because if local school districts actually had to contribute to their pension funds, they might have to raise local property taxes, which are also low. And that way of doing things has also been supported by Democrats and Republicans alike. The Democratic state House speaker has been trying to pass legislation requiring local school districts to fund at least a small percentage of their pensions for at least a year now, so they'd have some stake in holding down costs, but Republican state reps and enough Democratic state reps refuse to even consider that. All in all, this way of doing things has left the state's pension system only 45 percent funded. Most economists say pensions should be at least 80 percent funded.
In addition to buying locally produced honey, which is available in most of the U.S., people really need to be reading the ingredient labels on other foods they buy. After reading the Food Safety News report linked to in the article, I'd bet that if a product lists honey as an ingredient and is made by a huge food conglomerate, odds are the honey, or whatever it really is, came from China. And we in the U.S. really need to put some teeth in the FDA's inspection process.
Yes, as when the U.S. government "failed" by financing and building the Tennessee Valley Authority in the 1930s to bring cheap electricity to rural areas throughout the southern U.S. that were poorly served or completely unserved by the private utilities of the day. That's just one example of government stepping in to do what private companies only interested in short-term profits would never do. Today people in many countries enjoy better, more widespread, far cheaper Internet and Wifi access than the U.S., where most people have, at best, a choice of two monopolistic carriers only interested in squeezing higher and higher profits out of their customers. That's why, even in areas where U.S. citizens do have access to broadband and Wifi, it's way slower than many countries in Europe and Asia, costs far more, and is falling further and further behind. The private market is failing U.S. consumers.
Call your state bar association. Explain the situation as you have here, that you believe this law firm is possibly abusing the system in an effort to intimidate small businesses like yours into paying since that would likely cost less than hiring a law firm with expertise in patent law. Ask them to recommend some options, e.g., a non-profit legal center or a firm that wouldn't end up costing you much in return for sending a response to these guys basically just telling them to back off. You might also consider calling your state attorney general's office - they may someone tasked with helping small businesses in situations like this.
He did not "break in" to a storage closet. He walked into an unlocked room that was already being accessed by others, including a homeless man. He was never charged with the crime of breaking and entering. MIT had the option to have him charged with that, and they declined to do so. He covered his laptop as any sensible person might have done, to conceal it from others who could have walked into the unlocked room (and did) and taken it had they seen it sitting there in the open. Again, MIT had ample opportunity to have him charged with breaking and entering, as well as trespassing. They, as well as local prosecutors, declined to do that.
Don't know what you've tried Linux on but I've been running Kubuntu and Ubuntu (separate partitions) on my desktop for more than two years and it's never once crashed after a security/software update, and they come pretty often, once or twice a week usually, sometimes more. And I've done major version upgrades several times on each, again without problems. I started with Ubuntu 10.04 and am up to 12.04 now. I think I started with Kubuntu 10.10 and I'm also up to 12.04 on it. I use it most of the time now and I can't see how any other OS could possibly be more stable. It just keeps on working.
OK, I'll give at least one netbook some love. I got a Toshiba NB205 for free a few years ago from someone who wrecked the Windows on it with a virus and was just going to toss it. Bodhi Linux runs really fast and smooth on it these days with up-to-date Firefox, LibreOffice, GIMP, etc. It includes a 250gb hard drive, webcam, and a tough as nails metal case. The built-in speakers suck but that's what earphones are for. I throw it in the backpack for school and travel. I figure it must be six or seven years old but it still works really well for a lightweight computer on the go. It seems to be indestructible and it still hasn't cost me a cent. Maybe if they'd built more netbooks like that...
We see more stories about global warming on Slashdot lately because more of the predicted effects are becoming reality. That trend will continue because we will continue to do nothing to address it, opting to put our own short-term interests ahead of the costs to future generations. Nothing new there. Just ask Yeats:
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity."
Slashdot Mirror
I'm fully aware of the Supreme Court's recent rulings equating unlimited campaign spending with free speech. I disagree with their reasoning. Other democracies limit both overall campaign spending as well as the length of election campaigns, and those democracies function quite well. When the Court says, "This is because virtually every means of communicating ideas in today's mass society requires the expenditure of money," it ignores obvious alternative methods of mass communication. In the U.S., for example, we have public broadcasting networks in both radio and TV that could be used to give every candidate ample and equal opportunities to reach the public. The Court citing "free speech" as if it always triumphs every other consideration ignores the fact that our society and our courts often limit the free speech of individuals when not doing so would cause harm to other individuals or to society as a whole. Aside from that, I do not agree that campaign spending equals free speech. It comes down to whether or not we believe unlimited campaign spending distorts and corrupts the political process. I believe the evidence is that it clearly does, and I believe that issues like net neutrality illustrate that. Many of the representatives who signed Letter 2 that was referenced in the Ars Technica article represent areas where Internet access is very limited. They are betting that since so many of their constitutents don't have home Internet access, most of them won't even notice their actions on net neutrality or even know what it is. In fact, I doubt most of those representatives could explain net neutrality if asked. They got contributions and signed the letter they were asked to sign because that's how the campaign funding business works.
While it may be legal for a representative to vote a certain way, if they're voting that way because they're getting a payoff to vote that way, it's a bribe in my book. Calling it a campaign contribution is just semantics. Our system of unlimited spending on political campaigns enhances the likelihood that votes on issues such as net neutrality will go the way the highest bidders want it to go.
So if I'm a certified public accountant whose job depends on me taking classes every two years to remain certified and someone gives me cash to spend any way I want to fudge their books, it's a bribe; but if they pay for my classes and recertification to fudge their books, it's not a bribe? Sorry, I'm not seeing the distinction there.
Actually they are placing a $600 bet that they'll get a product in return that will be the envy of all their friends and will also be a really nice smartphone that's also a really nice full-fledged computer. People place bets much larger than that thousands of times a day in Vegas, where the odds that they'll win aren't nearly so good. Heck, people place bets much larger than that thousands of times a day on all kinds of investment opportunities. It's their $600 and they're taking a chance with it. There's nothing new at all about people spending their money that way.
Yes, unbelievable, isn't it? It's like when I went online to order a new laptop a few weeks ago - the private, for-profit company there also asked me for money. The nerve.
From "A Reporter's Notebook" Portsmouth, N.H., 1900: "As 1900 dawns, the Seacoast faces a shocking new technology. Is electricity safe? Is it just another toy for the rich? Do we really need it when gas lights work just fine and horses are easier to ride than cars? Should we develop this new science or leave the genie in the bulb?... A few automobiles have already made their way through our fair city, lured by the nearby sandy beaches, fine hotels, Revolutionary history and panoramic scenery. Hoards more of them cannot be far off, their engines fouling our already gritty air, their horns blaring as they compete for their share of the muddy downtown streets with the trolleys and the horse carts... Thankfully there is legislation planned that will require all motorcars to be proceeded by a man on foot waving a warning flag. This is certainly a commendable safety measure and should be supported."
"Now, good luck getting the VA to allow us to implement it." I get what you are saying, but taking the time and making the effort to overcome that kind of thing is why undertaking this kind of work is more difficult than just creating apps. And that's why, I think, she says that our best minds are being wasted when they could be put to work addressing issues like that.
If you read her opinion about government in the article and her bio (and the author is a woman), you'll see she is a conservative, and what she's arguing is precisely that people need to take more personal responsibility for their country's pressing problems and quit blissfully ignoring them. And, no, the problems are very complex - if they were simple, you wouldn't need bright minds to take them on.
I think her point is exactly that these are problems that are "social and political in nature," and that our brightest minds are mostly writing inane apps instead of tackling them. Software solutions would help solve many of them but, as she says, doing that work is hard and doesn't offer much of an opportunity to strike it rich.
The "he" you refer to is actually a "she," or did you not even bother to read the article?
Nice... just used it to correct a couple of errors in my neighborhood.
There are native Floridians?
Except that moving inward from the sea, for many people, will mean that their country will no longer exist. And resolving the causes of climate change requires improving technology, not limiting growth.
Well, I know that about a year from now MS will stop providing security and software updates for XP. And I know that just putting XP ($46), MS Office ($150) and anti-virus software ($44) on an old computer will cost $240. And that's if you don't want a decent graphics editor or things like publishing software, which will cost you more. Not really a "free" donation then, is it? It's like giving someone a car that's going to immediately cost them a bunch of money for repairs and insurance and then will quit running entirely in the near future and won't be resellable for anything but scrap. Um, no thanks.
Ah, another AC who feels a compulsion to comment despite an obvious lack of knowledge. "Say whatever you want about Windows and security?" OK, using an old obsolete OS like XP will give you a crippled computer that won't work very well, will rapidly become even more useless, and will likely result in any data you put on it ending up lost or corrupted. And it will cost you a small fortune to buy all the software you'll need to make your "free" donated computer usable. I'm not a geek, but I've used only Linux for years, exchange documents and files with Mac and Windows users constantly, haven't had anything "break," don't worry about security and viruses, and enjoy regularly updated software. Oh, and it's cost me nothing.
That's not really true. In Illinois' case there is a pension problem because for the past 20 years state government, under both Democratic and Republican governors, has balanced the budget by repeatedly deferring annual payments into the pension funds. So while they've collected money from employees for pensions, they've used much of it instead to pay general operating costs and keep taxes down (the state only has a 3-percent income tax). They've also refused to make local school systems contribute anything to fund their pensions - instead the state funds those 100-percent, even though it's the local school boards who decide how much their pensions are. That's been done because if local school districts actually had to contribute to their pension funds, they might have to raise local property taxes, which are also low. And that way of doing things has also been supported by Democrats and Republicans alike. The Democratic state House speaker has been trying to pass legislation requiring local school districts to fund at least a small percentage of their pensions for at least a year now, so they'd have some stake in holding down costs, but Republican state reps and enough Democratic state reps refuse to even consider that. All in all, this way of doing things has left the state's pension system only 45 percent funded. Most economists say pensions should be at least 80 percent funded.
In addition to buying locally produced honey, which is available in most of the U.S., people really need to be reading the ingredient labels on other foods they buy. After reading the Food Safety News report linked to in the article, I'd bet that if a product lists honey as an ingredient and is made by a huge food conglomerate, odds are the honey, or whatever it really is, came from China. And we in the U.S. really need to put some teeth in the FDA's inspection process.
Yes, as when the U.S. government "failed" by financing and building the Tennessee Valley Authority in the 1930s to bring cheap electricity to rural areas throughout the southern U.S. that were poorly served or completely unserved by the private utilities of the day. That's just one example of government stepping in to do what private companies only interested in short-term profits would never do. Today people in many countries enjoy better, more widespread, far cheaper Internet and Wifi access than the U.S., where most people have, at best, a choice of two monopolistic carriers only interested in squeezing higher and higher profits out of their customers. That's why, even in areas where U.S. citizens do have access to broadband and Wifi, it's way slower than many countries in Europe and Asia, costs far more, and is falling further and further behind. The private market is failing U.S. consumers.
Call your state bar association. Explain the situation as you have here, that you believe this law firm is possibly abusing the system in an effort to intimidate small businesses like yours into paying since that would likely cost less than hiring a law firm with expertise in patent law. Ask them to recommend some options, e.g., a non-profit legal center or a firm that wouldn't end up costing you much in return for sending a response to these guys basically just telling them to back off. You might also consider calling your state attorney general's office - they may someone tasked with helping small businesses in situations like this.
He did not "break in" to a storage closet. He walked into an unlocked room that was already being accessed by others, including a homeless man. He was never charged with the crime of breaking and entering. MIT had the option to have him charged with that, and they declined to do so. He covered his laptop as any sensible person might have done, to conceal it from others who could have walked into the unlocked room (and did) and taken it had they seen it sitting there in the open. Again, MIT had ample opportunity to have him charged with breaking and entering, as well as trespassing. They, as well as local prosecutors, declined to do that.
Don't know what you've tried Linux on but I've been running Kubuntu and Ubuntu (separate partitions) on my desktop for more than two years and it's never once crashed after a security/software update, and they come pretty often, once or twice a week usually, sometimes more. And I've done major version upgrades several times on each, again without problems. I started with Ubuntu 10.04 and am up to 12.04 now. I think I started with Kubuntu 10.10 and I'm also up to 12.04 on it. I use it most of the time now and I can't see how any other OS could possibly be more stable. It just keeps on working.
Of course now we can all eagerly await the responses from the Heartland Institute and others touting the health and economic benefits of soot.
OK, I'll give at least one netbook some love. I got a Toshiba NB205 for free a few years ago from someone who wrecked the Windows on it with a virus and was just going to toss it. Bodhi Linux runs really fast and smooth on it these days with up-to-date Firefox, LibreOffice, GIMP, etc. It includes a 250gb hard drive, webcam, and a tough as nails metal case. The built-in speakers suck but that's what earphones are for. I throw it in the backpack for school and travel. I figure it must be six or seven years old but it still works really well for a lightweight computer on the go. It seems to be indestructible and it still hasn't cost me a cent. Maybe if they'd built more netbooks like that...
We see more stories about global warming on Slashdot lately because more of the predicted effects are becoming reality. That trend will continue because we will continue to do nothing to address it, opting to put our own short-term interests ahead of the costs to future generations. Nothing new there. Just ask Yeats: "The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity."
Um, that would be the point: They knew. And in Groat's case, they didn't.