Limiting spending in elections inherently favors incumbents
No, limiting spending inherently prevents the wealthy from dominating the discourse in a way that the non-wealthy simply cannot.
It says the more money you have, the more say you get. That's feudalism. Which is pretty much the opposite of the principles on which the US was founded.
So, do you really believe you get a good system of government when the more money you have the more access you have to political speech?
Or do you end up with a system which is heavily skewed to the wishes of a handful of wealthy people -- which is pretty much what you have now.
If rich people can pay lots of money to convince government to lower their taxes while cutting services for everybody else... well, sooner or later, that 'everybody else' might decide they've had enough and do something about it.
And that didn't work out so well for Marie Antoinette and others who felt they should be entitled to cal the shots.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed
Unless you have lots of money, in which case you're more equal, and the governed be damned because you can make what you want happens. So, we're back to "four legs good, two legs better".
And then the governed decide that they're tired of putting up with your shit.
If you're going to build your society around what the wealthy can afford to buy in terms of political action, you will end up with an inherently unjust society.
When I got an email offering us a.ninja tld for our business domains I died a little bit inside...
LOL... I can think of so many cool domain names ending in.ninja it's sad... My friend Mark says that he once saw a ninja totally uppercut a kid just for opening a window.;-)
Sadly, I'm sure it will be for things more like "projectmanagement.ninja", so, yeah, I guess that might make you die a little inside.
Or, the poster is going for more of a 'classical' education where you learn what came before, understand the roots and origins of it, and then have a greater context for what came after.
For instance, if all these smarmy teenagers would stop pretending that their cool punk rock clothes have never been done before and realize there are people old enough to be their parents who used to wear the same things, they'd stop acting like they invented this stuff.
And, anybody who still acts like the 80s was cool. Those of us who lived through it would mostly like to forget large chunks of it. (Well, technically, some of us already have;-)
And what stock holders like tends to screw over the company in 5-10 years...
That long?
Stock holders are very shortsighted, and typically have little or no interest in the medium/long term outcomes for the company -- they just want the stock to go up by 25% so they can sell it to some other sucker before the bottom falls out.
Tesla is in the business of selling cars, not charging stations.
Indeed they're not.
It sounds like he's hoping to spread around the cost of charging:
If Musk does go through with this plan, he wants the competitors to go along with Tesla's "free power for life" clause. All the electricity used to charge up a Tesla at the Superchargers is included in the (hefty) purchase price of the car.
So if other companies are making a free charging station which is also compatible with the Tesla, then Tesla makes even more money by not having to pay for the charging.
It sounds like there's some magic going on in here where the owner doesn't pay the cost of charging their car, but it gets foisted off onto everybody else (ie taxpayers) because having electric cars is such a good idea the rest of the world should pay for it.
And I'm not sure why the owners of electric cars should have their consumption subsidized, other than it helps Tesla sell more cars. If it's such a great idea, why aren't the owners getting charged? Someone is going to have to pay for that, and it will likely get applied to other products.
So you could pay more for milk in order that someone who owns a Tesla gets free charging. Which is great if you can afford to buy a Tesla, but not so great if you need to buy milk.
It exists. It's called a credit card, underwritten by a real bank, which will adhere to actual banking laws instead of "whatever we decide we want to do", and actually have some stake in fraud prevention.
'gas' stations? That will go the way of 'dialing a number', 'hanging up the phone', 'taping' a program
So, basically nowhere?
Once those become the standard word to describe something, people are very reluctant to take on the new names for it.
And I'm betting they won't for some time, because they're very entrenched in the language.
I'm not even aware of an alternate to "dialing a number", even if I haven't used a phone with a dial in years. Clicking the number sounds silly. And, let's face it, butt-clicking doesn't have the same, er, ring to it.
This shows him to be pro society. From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
Or, alternatively, he will make more money in the long run if other people invest in the infrastructure needed to charge the cars he sells.
Maybe this is like crowdsourcing, where you convince a bunch of people to help develop your product and keep all of the money for yourself -- kinda like Gracenote did with CDDB.
Sorry, but his past association with PayPal means I don't trust he has purely "pro society" motives.
There's only a couple of Kinect games for the Xbox one, and they all got bad to mediocre reviews.
That's kind of a side effect of not being backwards compatible with the XBox 360. You essentially start with a fresh platform with nothing on it.
Microsoft's last ditch strategy
Microsoft more or less mishandled the release of the XBone from the start, and it seems like it's gone downhill from there.
Pretty much with the first round of press releases saying what the features would be (and telling it would require an internet connection, and no used games) I knew that my XBox 360 was in no danger of being replaced by this.
For me, the device was DOA long before it was released, even if they back pedaled on some of their initial stupid.
If it's held in secret how can anyone be sure it's anything that remotely resembles a fair trail?
You take their word for it, apparently.
Since about 2005 the home secretary has the power to put anyone under house arrest indefinitely without any burden of proof. The UK government don't even need trails anymore.
Welcome to the Brave New World. Awesome, isn't it?
Secret laws, secret courts, secret trials. Now shut up citizen (or in the UK I guess it's "subjects"), before we have to hurt you.
Slashdot Mirror
No, limiting spending inherently prevents the wealthy from dominating the discourse in a way that the non-wealthy simply cannot.
It says the more money you have, the more say you get. That's feudalism. Which is pretty much the opposite of the principles on which the US was founded.
So, do you really believe you get a good system of government when the more money you have the more access you have to political speech?
Or do you end up with a system which is heavily skewed to the wishes of a handful of wealthy people -- which is pretty much what you have now.
If rich people can pay lots of money to convince government to lower their taxes while cutting services for everybody else ... well, sooner or later, that 'everybody else' might decide they've had enough and do something about it.
And that didn't work out so well for Marie Antoinette and others who felt they should be entitled to cal the shots.
Unless you have lots of money, in which case you're more equal, and the governed be damned because you can make what you want happens. So, we're back to "four legs good, two legs better".
And then the governed decide that they're tired of putting up with your shit.
If you're going to build your society around what the wealthy can afford to buy in terms of political action, you will end up with an inherently unjust society.
LOL ... I can think of so many cool domain names ending in .ninja it's sad ... My friend Mark says that he once saw a ninja totally uppercut a kid just for opening a window. ;-)
Sadly, I'm sure it will be for things more like "projectmanagement.ninja", so, yeah, I guess that might make you die a little inside.
Or, the poster is going for more of a 'classical' education where you learn what came before, understand the roots and origins of it, and then have a greater context for what came after.
For instance, if all these smarmy teenagers would stop pretending that their cool punk rock clothes have never been done before and realize there are people old enough to be their parents who used to wear the same things, they'd stop acting like they invented this stuff.
And, anybody who still acts like the 80s was cool. Those of us who lived through it would mostly like to forget large chunks of it. (Well, technically, some of us already have ;-)
Fortunately, by the time I've been a "grownup" for 30-40 years, I should have passed the average lifespan of a human and won't have to find out.
I've been an adult for 25 years or so, but so far being a "grownup" has been something I've avoided. ;-)
Hmmm ... several permutations.
Female dating male comic nerd. Male dating female comic nerd. Female dating female comic nerd. Male dating male comic nerd.
Most frightening, one or both could be furries. ;-)
And the porn. Always with the porn.
If you're looking for old school comics, you need an old school editor ... and what could be more old school than a modal editor like vim?
If you're really nostalgic, take notes on the back of some old punch cards. Maybe festoon your workstation with paper tape.
That long?
Stock holders are very shortsighted, and typically have little or no interest in the medium/long term outcomes for the company -- they just want the stock to go up by 25% so they can sell it to some other sucker before the bottom falls out.
If you consider PayPal a trusted third party ... well, good luck with that. I sincerely hope it works out well for you.
Me, I consider PayPal to be about as trustworthy as your average meth head, and wouldn't let them near my money on the best of days.
Indeed they're not.
It sounds like he's hoping to spread around the cost of charging:
So if other companies are making a free charging station which is also compatible with the Tesla, then Tesla makes even more money by not having to pay for the charging.
It sounds like there's some magic going on in here where the owner doesn't pay the cost of charging their car, but it gets foisted off onto everybody else (ie taxpayers) because having electric cars is such a good idea the rest of the world should pay for it.
And I'm not sure why the owners of electric cars should have their consumption subsidized, other than it helps Tesla sell more cars. If it's such a great idea, why aren't the owners getting charged? Someone is going to have to pay for that, and it will likely get applied to other products.
So you could pay more for milk in order that someone who owns a Tesla gets free charging. Which is great if you can afford to buy a Tesla, but not so great if you need to buy milk.
It exists. It's called a credit card, underwritten by a real bank, which will adhere to actual banking laws instead of "whatever we decide we want to do", and actually have some stake in fraud prevention.
So, basically nowhere?
Once those become the standard word to describe something, people are very reluctant to take on the new names for it.
And I'm betting they won't for some time, because they're very entrenched in the language.
I'm not even aware of an alternate to "dialing a number", even if I haven't used a phone with a dial in years. Clicking the number sounds silly. And, let's face it, butt-clicking doesn't have the same, er, ring to it.
Or, alternatively, he will make more money in the long run if other people invest in the infrastructure needed to charge the cars he sells.
Maybe this is like crowdsourcing, where you convince a bunch of people to help develop your product and keep all of the money for yourself -- kinda like Gracenote did with CDDB.
Sorry, but his past association with PayPal means I don't trust he has purely "pro society" motives.
Hmmm ... I'm not in the public eye, I hope that doesn't make me a recluse.
I'll have to ask the guys I play golf with.
That's kind of a side effect of not being backwards compatible with the XBox 360. You essentially start with a fresh platform with nothing on it.
Microsoft more or less mishandled the release of the XBone from the start, and it seems like it's gone downhill from there.
Pretty much with the first round of press releases saying what the features would be (and telling it would require an internet connection, and no used games) I knew that my XBox 360 was in no danger of being replaced by this.
For me, the device was DOA long before it was released, even if they back pedaled on some of their initial stupid.
LOL ... my TomTom hasn't incurred roaming charges even once.
So far it's been compatible with every rental car I've had.
And no extra fees besides my map updates.
God ... the courier font ... it burns
LOL, or $750 ... something like that ... need more coffee apparently.
Funny, my HTC Desire C isn't locked to the Carrier. My last two Motorola Krazr phones weren't either.
I didn't think you could carrier lock a SIM based phone ... but I could be completely mistaken.
Even still ... there is no sensible way that 50MB of data is worth $11K.
That's simply obscene.
Wont any SIM based phone work with a local SIM? Isn't that the point?
Adam Savage ran into this before.
Either AT&T is incompetent, or (quite possibly) the Canadian carriers are gouging.
This is hardly the first time we've heard of this happening. And I doubt it will be the last.
The Chinese invented many many things.
You take their word for it, apparently.
Welcome to the Brave New World. Awesome, isn't it?
Secret laws, secret courts, secret trials. Now shut up citizen (or in the UK I guess it's "subjects"), before we have to hurt you.