The ribbon still sucks. Yes, it made things I use all the time slightly handier, however that came at the cost of it being much harder to find things I use less often.
Sure, long term climate change is very scary, especially if it ends up freeing the methane clathrates, but in the medium term I'm actually more worried about acidification. Additionally it's a lot easier to prove and much more clearly both bad and a man-made effect.
Certainly not. Just the same, we shouldn't back down every time Democrats cherish stupid beliefs either. The two sides hold different stupid beliefs, so you have to at least give them credit for variety though. *Sigh* If only there were a viable party with fewer stupid beliefs. (I'm no longer idealistic enough to believe you could have one with no stupid beliefs at all)
I never said that. Instead, I'm implying that rights also come with responsibilities. If I enjoy the benefits of being a member, it is incumbent on me to do my part. Does that mean I'm smiling when I do my taxes or have to deal with some annoying regulation that I personally disagree with, of course not. Are there things about the US I'd like to change, of course there are. There are no perfect societies and as of yet I haven't seen anywhere else I'd rather move to.
Piffle, you don't need a theory to prove it works. Build a test engine in a microsat, release it in orbit, point it at the moon and fire it up. If it sits there and sputters, then yeah it's probably bogus, if on the other hand the thing accelerates for a couple of days then slams into the lunar surface, well then you've got grant money for the next 30 years easy.
The solution is pretty straightforward, you get a number of votes based on the relative size of your country's population, land mass, and wealth. That's pretty much how it works anyways, might as well just formalize it.
Really? How many of your financial relations with the government are voluntary on your part?
How many of your financial relations with corporations are voluntary on your part? (and for the ones that aren't, could it possibly be due to a government-granted monopoly?)
I choose to remain an American citizen, that choice has consequences which include things like taxes. The government, even in a Libertarian society, provides necessary services and those have to be funded somehow. So yes, I consider that voluntary. I may have some things to say about the level of taxes and how they're being spent, but I do get express my opinion at voting time. My vote may influence the government about as much as voting my couple of shares of a mega-corp, but that's how it works in both cases.
In private life I have a number of needs which MUST be filled, for example I don't own enough land to raise my own food so I have to buy food. I can choose between a limited number of oligopolistic providers who tend to collude and to whom my personal business is miniscule so it's pretty much take it or leave it. Don't like it? Feel free to starve. I'm really feeling the freedom there.
Something like double liability might be a nice compromise that still allows passive investment without putting your personal property at stake.
Well it would be at stake, it just wouldn't be unlimited liability, which is frankly scary enough that people would demand huge returns to compensate. Quantifiable but increased limited liability is probably the best compromise that could be achieved within our current system.
I would've left you to your follies, except your decisions to hand over more and more control over your life to the government empowers it to take the same control over mine.
I'm not suggesting I want an all powerful government, I don't trust them either. My point is that corporations can effectively oppress you just as well as the government even if they use different tools. Besides, a corporation is, by definition, a government construct due to its limited liability so don't get too enthused about their free market status.
The problem with many libertarians is that they obsess over the whole "governments can oppress you because of the power imbalance" idea then proceed to ignore any other types of power imbalance.
But they have the right and ability to do so if they wish, which is the key point. It's not necessary for 100% of free citizens to be armed as long as quite a few are and the rest can do so at will.
I eventually see this entire system collapsing within the next ten years and not just IT (Information Technology) but the whole economy.
It'll likely be a slow hollowing out rather than an overnight crash. It'll be a like a giant game of musical chairs with everyone scrambling for fewer and fewer seats. I could easily see us reaching 50% unemployment even without the development of strong AI, just the extension of current trends in robotics and expert systems.
4 Years is way too long, that would easily be exploited. I say if H1B workers are so awesome that we can't find Americans of equivalent skill then heck, we want them to be citizens. Fast track citizenship for all H1B workers!
so, you admit openly to brazenly breaking the law?
He didn't break the law, he complied with the letter but not the intent, which is how our system works. Of course a more sensible system would require lawmakers to write a statement of intent to accompany the letter of the law and for juries and judges to consider the intent of the laws, but that's the not the system we have.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? Macros are the right solution for a whole class of work problems.
2010+ with ribbon is much better than 2003.
The ribbon still sucks. Yes, it made things I use all the time slightly handier, however that came at the cost of it being much harder to find things I use less often.
Sorry, mis-posted as reply to reply instead of reply to parent.
Personally, I think dogs are a pain in the ass and it annoys me how dogs are generally favored as pets
Every time you pet a cat the terrorists win, why do you hate America?
Sure, long term climate change is very scary, especially if it ends up freeing the methane clathrates, but in the medium term I'm actually more worried about acidification. Additionally it's a lot easier to prove and much more clearly both bad and a man-made effect.
Certainly not. Just the same, we shouldn't back down every time Democrats cherish stupid beliefs either. The two sides hold different stupid beliefs, so you have to at least give them credit for variety though. *Sigh* If only there were a viable party with fewer stupid beliefs. (I'm no longer idealistic enough to believe you could have one with no stupid beliefs at all)
Duh? This would be more analogous to impulse drive rather than warp drive. Did you even watch the show?
Or perhaps it could just prompt for a password on installation like any reasonable distro does?
I never said that. Instead, I'm implying that rights also come with responsibilities. If I enjoy the benefits of being a member, it is incumbent on me to do my part. Does that mean I'm smiling when I do my taxes or have to deal with some annoying regulation that I personally disagree with, of course not. Are there things about the US I'd like to change, of course there are. There are no perfect societies and as of yet I haven't seen anywhere else I'd rather move to.
Piffle, you don't need a theory to prove it works. Build a test engine in a microsat, release it in orbit, point it at the moon and fire it up. If it sits there and sputters, then yeah it's probably bogus, if on the other hand the thing accelerates for a couple of days then slams into the lunar surface, well then you've got grant money for the next 30 years easy.
Which is why we should fund a project to use Venus as a test bed.
The solution is pretty straightforward, you get a number of votes based on the relative size of your country's population, land mass, and wealth. That's pretty much how it works anyways, might as well just formalize it.
Really? How many of your financial relations with the government are voluntary on your part?
How many of your financial relations with corporations are voluntary on your part? (and for the ones that aren't, could it possibly be due to a government-granted monopoly?)
I choose to remain an American citizen, that choice has consequences which include things like taxes. The government, even in a Libertarian society, provides necessary services and those have to be funded somehow. So yes, I consider that voluntary. I may have some things to say about the level of taxes and how they're being spent, but I do get express my opinion at voting time. My vote may influence the government about as much as voting my couple of shares of a mega-corp, but that's how it works in both cases.
In private life I have a number of needs which MUST be filled, for example I don't own enough land to raise my own food so I have to buy food. I can choose between a limited number of oligopolistic providers who tend to collude and to whom my personal business is miniscule so it's pretty much take it or leave it. Don't like it? Feel free to starve. I'm really feeling the freedom there.
Something like double liability might be a nice compromise that still allows passive investment without putting your personal property at stake.
Well it would be at stake, it just wouldn't be unlimited liability, which is frankly scary enough that people would demand huge returns to compensate. Quantifiable but increased limited liability is probably the best compromise that could be achieved within our current system.
Right and the correct decision would be to then demote that person back down one level to where they were doing a great job. Never happens though.
Replace them with H1B contractors that you could hire and lay off twice a day?
What third world hell hole do you live in where they still build grocery stores within walking distance?
There is much anger in this post.
I would've left you to your follies, except your decisions to hand over more and more control over your life to the government empowers it to take the same control over mine.
I'm not suggesting I want an all powerful government, I don't trust them either. My point is that corporations can effectively oppress you just as well as the government even if they use different tools. Besides, a corporation is, by definition, a government construct due to its limited liability so don't get too enthused about their free market status.
The problem with many libertarians is that they obsess over the whole "governments can oppress you because of the power imbalance" idea then proceed to ignore any other types of power imbalance.
But they have the right and ability to do so if they wish, which is the key point. It's not necessary for 100% of free citizens to be armed as long as quite a few are and the rest can do so at will.
I eventually see this entire system collapsing within the next ten years and not just IT (Information Technology) but the whole economy.
It'll likely be a slow hollowing out rather than an overnight crash. It'll be a like a giant game of musical chairs with everyone scrambling for fewer and fewer seats. I could easily see us reaching 50% unemployment even without the development of strong AI, just the extension of current trends in robotics and expert systems.
4 Years is way too long, that would easily be exploited. I say if H1B workers are so awesome that we can't find Americans of equivalent skill then heck, we want them to be citizens. Fast track citizenship for all H1B workers!
Sign me up for a different system.
Figure out something else that actually works and isn't based on wishful fantasy and I'm there. Till then we're stuck with capitalism.
Corporate raiding in the 80s finished off the last companies that thought about "the long run", now it's all about next quarter.
so, you admit openly to brazenly breaking the law?
He didn't break the law, he complied with the letter but not the intent, which is how our system works. Of course a more sensible system would require lawmakers to write a statement of intent to accompany the letter of the law and for juries and judges to consider the intent of the laws, but that's the not the system we have.