Radio is an ad for albums? Huh. I thought albums were ads for concerts. Heck I only $9 for a CD but I pay triple that for a concert tshirt and double THAT for the concert ticket.
I'm in my mid thirties. The last time I listened to the radio for more than sixty seconds was when I was in high school. Do a lot of people still listen to the radio? Are these people who have never heard of MP3s? How hard is it to press play on a pod instead of a radio?
What kind of idiot would buy a cell phone with a non-replaceable battery? That would be even more stupid than if it had a proprietary data-cable port. Nobody in their right mind would but such a crippled device.
I think your complaint is invalid. The simile to Apple's current market strategy is strong and compelling:
Today Apple builds the handheld computer-pod, offers an app store including support for in-app purchases, and takes a huge cut of all proceeds.
Tomorrow Apple builds a car, offers an app store including a per-mile insurance app which draws funds from your App Store balance, and takes a huge cut of all the proceeds.
You are right. It depends on the state and statutes vary widely. My understanding is that noncompete contracts are hard to enforce in California, but obviously this company thinks it is possible.
It seems like your third step begs your whole algorithm. How can you know how close you are to the destination if you haven't calculated a minimum route to the destination?
Still, I understand your point, which is valid. Your algorithm is simplified for explanatory purposes but fully formed the example would be fine.
The article writeup doesn't imply a problem to me. I read it as a feel-good story about a douchebag getting nipped. Assuming he is guilty, fuck that guy.
Seriously. RoknrolZombie makes a ridiculous point. If justice meant every citizen had to read every court transcript then justice would be impossible.
Instead, we hire professionals to do that work for us. We call them "judges". To be extra super careful, instead of just having one judge we have several layers of judges who can overrule findings. The system is open to critique on the details but I can't imagine a fundamentally different system that would be better.
Yeah that's what I thought, too. Wow, so your kids turned into nurses and programmers, like everyone else's kids? Great! It looks like homeschooling had not effect on their outcomes.
I have a pretty low opinion of homeschooling. My objection is practical not categorical. Homeschooling is theoretically reasonable but I've never actually met a reasonable homeschooling parent. I'm sure there is one out there somewhere but she must be in hiding.
The correct answer is that no, the government does not, can not, and should not try to "require" vaccination. By that I mean, they barge into your house, hold you down, and inject you over your protests. That is a patent violation of bodily autonomy; the government can't do that. So, no, America isn't going to "require" vaccination.
What it can and should do is to deny access to some public spaces to the unvaccinated. The primary example is public schools. Yes, public school students should be vaccinated according to the best practices of the medical community.
Furthermore, government should flip the legal protections currently surrounding vaccines. Instead of having laws that protect the unvaccinated from having to disclose their status, or protect them from discrimination, the laws should require disclosure and protect those who wish to discriminate against the unvaccinated. Specifically I mean that places such as Disneyland should be allowed to discriminate against the unvaccinated for hiring.
Finally, the entire concept of "religious/conscience waivers" should be discarded not only for vaccines but for all situations. Why would we have a rule which you are allowed to break if you simply say that you don't like the rule (which is what a religious waiver means)? Such waivers are facially preposterous and would be irrelevant to my policy suggestion.
But strictly speaking Mr. Christie is correct. Nobody should be "required" to receive any injections.
Compare the early internet to early FM radio. Both were awesome, then were ruined when Business majors showed up. Content controlled by unmoneyed rabble is superior.
Exactly. So how long do advertisers have to play fair before they can be forgiven? I'd say, one hundred years. See ya in 2098. If the advertisers are gentle and respectful from now until then, then my grandchildren can consider unblocking ads.
Slashdot Mirror
"not in scope"
I see what you did there.
I'd say he's tied for first place with Tyson. Who do you think is "more fore" than the two of them?
The prisoners aren't the customers.
Radio is an ad for albums? Huh. I thought albums were ads for concerts. Heck I only $9 for a CD but I pay triple that for a concert tshirt and double THAT for the concert ticket.
I'm in my mid thirties. The last time I listened to the radio for more than sixty seconds was when I was in high school. Do a lot of people still listen to the radio? Are these people who have never heard of MP3s? How hard is it to press play on a pod instead of a radio?
The list of hardware tech that Apple has developed is small and underwhelming. It's not zero length, but it's nearly zero impressiveness.
What kind of idiot would buy a cell phone with a non-replaceable battery? That would be even more stupid than if it had a proprietary data-cable port. Nobody in their right mind would but such a crippled device.
I think your complaint is invalid. The simile to Apple's current market strategy is strong and compelling:
Today Apple builds the handheld computer-pod, offers an app store including support for in-app purchases, and takes a huge cut of all proceeds.
Tomorrow Apple builds a car, offers an app store including a per-mile insurance app which draws funds from your App Store balance, and takes a huge cut of all the proceeds.
That's perfectly cromulent.
You are right. It depends on the state and statutes vary widely. My understanding is that noncompete contracts are hard to enforce in California, but obviously this company thinks it is possible.
I don't know, man, it sounds like you were in a position to argue. You could have asked him what it was worth to him.
I watched it. I thought it was above average for a gross slapstick comedy.
That problem was solved 220 years ago. Since then the problem has been dumb voters. Democracy, as they say, is the government you deserve.
The American market can enjoy this because of the nanny state. Thanks, big government! Fuck you, free market!
It seems like your third step begs your whole algorithm. How can you know how close you are to the destination if you haven't calculated a minimum route to the destination?
Still, I understand your point, which is valid. Your algorithm is simplified for explanatory purposes but fully formed the example would be fine.
The article writeup doesn't imply a problem to me. I read it as a feel-good story about a douchebag getting nipped. Assuming he is guilty, fuck that guy.
Freedom of speech would be at issue if the government forced you to take it down. That's not the current topic.
Zombie said "injustice exists... because apathy does". That implies "is able to read, but doesn't".
Off topic: "Continuing Criminal Enterprise" would be a good name for a band.
Seriously. RoknrolZombie makes a ridiculous point. If justice meant every citizen had to read every court transcript then justice would be impossible.
Instead, we hire professionals to do that work for us. We call them "judges". To be extra super careful, instead of just having one judge we have several layers of judges who can overrule findings. The system is open to critique on the details but I can't imagine a fundamentally different system that would be better.
Yeah that's what I thought, too. Wow, so your kids turned into nurses and programmers, like everyone else's kids? Great! It looks like homeschooling had not effect on their outcomes.
I have a pretty low opinion of homeschooling. My objection is practical not categorical. Homeschooling is theoretically reasonable but I've never actually met a reasonable homeschooling parent. I'm sure there is one out there somewhere but she must be in hiding.
The correct answer is that no, the government does not, can not, and should not try to "require" vaccination. By that I mean, they barge into your house, hold you down, and inject you over your protests. That is a patent violation of bodily autonomy; the government can't do that. So, no, America isn't going to "require" vaccination.
What it can and should do is to deny access to some public spaces to the unvaccinated. The primary example is public schools. Yes, public school students should be vaccinated according to the best practices of the medical community.
Furthermore, government should flip the legal protections currently surrounding vaccines. Instead of having laws that protect the unvaccinated from having to disclose their status, or protect them from discrimination, the laws should require disclosure and protect those who wish to discriminate against the unvaccinated. Specifically I mean that places such as Disneyland should be allowed to discriminate against the unvaccinated for hiring.
Finally, the entire concept of "religious/conscience waivers" should be discarded not only for vaccines but for all situations. Why would we have a rule which you are allowed to break if you simply say that you don't like the rule (which is what a religious waiver means)? Such waivers are facially preposterous and would be irrelevant to my policy suggestion.
But strictly speaking Mr. Christie is correct. Nobody should be "required" to receive any injections.
Compare the early internet to early FM radio. Both were awesome, then were ruined when Business majors showed up. Content controlled by unmoneyed rabble is superior.
As long as ad companies occasionally show ads, I'll keep running ad blocking software.
You are seriously an asshat. Doesn't anyone have mod points? Let's get this jerk to -2.
Exactly. So how long do advertisers have to play fair before they can be forgiven? I'd say, one hundred years. See ya in 2098. If the advertisers are gentle and respectful from now until then, then my grandchildren can consider unblocking ads.