I wouldn't bother with GP (PopeRatzo.) I've debated with him on this and other economic issues before, and he seems to create his own definitions for common economic terms based on absolutely nothing, (my guess is sourced from something akin to urban dictionary) and then insists that his definition is the actual definition.
I'd mod you up for accuracy if you had the points, as very few people on Slashdot seem to understand what these terms mean (i.e. frequently confusing the terms socialism and welfare, or citing patent or copyright abuse as examples of the free market at work, when that couldn't be further from the truth.)
Why is that being modded down? The copyright gods demand blood. This person is in violation.. Just read that little notice on the first or second page... "All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form..."
Nobody modded him down. He's from Gay Nigger Association of America. I'm not joking, or trolling, or trying to be racist, that's the actual name of the group he represents, more details about them here:
Your argument essentially amounts to "it's not awful, because the last one was worse." Just because the last one was worse doesn't mean the current one isn't bad.
So why are you singling out the Chinese government
You might want to go re-read my original reply to this thread because I pretty clearly didn't.
Is it? I think it's obvious that I understand the government a bit better than he does. After all, the fact that he referred the federal government as "the fed" should be pretty self explanatory.
I like how you repeatedly identify a government that is well known to suppress freedom of speech and very violently and brutally kill political dissidents as somehow not being an awful government.
Remember, back then, only white male landowners were allowed to vote.
The reason they did that was because at the time they had no other way to make sure you lived in the district that you were voting in. Also you didn't exactly have to own a huge parcel of land, you just had to own any piece of real property that had your name on it. By doing that, you were basically able to prove that in fact you were a lawful resident and thus could legally vote.
And by the way, back then it was common for just about everybody to own land, and the reason why is because some 90+ percent of the population were all farmers. That didn't mean they were rich by any stretch though, as in fact most farmers were poor.
How is the Chinese government "awful"? They've drastically increased the standard of living in that country over the past few decades, and turned it into a major world economic power.
Uh huh. The same can also be said about Nazi Germany. What are you getting at here?
Not saying it didn't happen, but I think it's suspect. It's possible that it's a "false flag"
No, this is somewhat typical in Eastern countries, i.e. professional malware software companies pay system integrators to install crap on their systems. This letter itself looks like it was written by somebody from China (most of the spammers there learn English in chat sessions, i.e. selling gold in World of Warcraft, so they pick up a lot of the crap habits that people have in those places, hence this letter is full of shit speak, i.e. instead of "you" they say "u", or other things like often saying hehe or haha when something isn't at all funny; note the "Hah." at the end of the paragraph.)
Anyways if you've ever heard of those incidents where anything from flash drives, phones, laptops, etc, have come with malware out of the factory, it's usually because some spammer paid off somebody with the ability to add it to the master images, and that person pockets the money.
There is no perfect government, but given how awful what we have is I for one would be willing to risk something new.
Awful? No, awful is how I'd describe governments like that of Venezuela or China. I'd describe ours using a word like frustrating, but frustration is a feeling that will always exist when interacting with any kind of large entity, (better known as a bureaucracy) and no matter how "direct democratic" you make it, that will never change.
Because his arguments match all of about 0% with reality he's probably one of those "I don't like the private sector because megacorps are evil and therefore the government does it best" types who have been reading too many cyberpunk novels in his parent's basement. They've been coming out of the woodwork a lot since SpaceX made a pretty historic spaceflight achievement.
The tough on crime crowd, also known as the board of directors of for-profit prisons
Actually the people who put the biggest lobbying pressure on being "tough on crime" are the prison guard unions, and indeed, there's a lot of scandal and coverup involved in it too.
In fact, in a lot of states they're the biggest one pushing against legalization of Marijuana. Why? Because it gives them LOTS of job security, perhaps more so than any other crime. But, don't let the pro union types hear this, or else you'll get an earful about how unions are in it to protect the working man...
Uh...You mean like the 1990's era search engines that rank results based on keywords? Who are you, Rip Van Winkle? With modern search engines you aren't likely to be found that way as they tend to rank pages based on how well people like them. If nobody hears about your product to begin with, then how are they going to like it?
Horseshit. You are totally ignoring that other metric they use to get money... Namely investors.
Are you dumb, or high? I can't tell. If none of the above, then I'm sorry, but I can't help you, nor can anybody else for that matter.
I wonder how long before Google becomes genericided.
That probably won't happen unless somebody else can own their own google domain name, which the use of the trademark makes explicit reference to. Since only one entity can own it, that's not likely to ever happen.
This is likewise why Microsoft is trying, rather unsuccessfully, to push people to say "bing it", which appears in in-show product placements, or "bing and decide", which appears in their commercials. They wouldn't do either if they felt they could ever lose the trademark.
I first read the headline like: Missing champion skier inches near crashed drone, as if it was a search and rescue drone that crashed while looking for him.
Well you never know, they might overturn it. So what if somebody writes the word FUCK on their license plate? Maybe they're a pornstar and they want people to know it.
In fact I even think the FCC should drop its decency rules as well for the same reason. Does that mean we'll start seeing porn channels on the terrestrial channels? Well, no, given that cable channels don't do that, and they even filter out swear words when they aren't under any obligation to do either. But the reason the FCC decency rules should go the way of the dodo is because some really good shows like Game of Thrones could never be on the air.
I personally, consciously support advertising because I recognize the the value from both the perspective of the advertiser and the website. However I still use adblock because the way these ads work is just downright annoying, but, I leave the acceptable ads option turned on to enable the ones that aren't.
Consider the perspective of the sponsor: When you have a new product you're trying to sell, you need a way to communicate with your customer that it is in fact available for them to buy. Take something you obviously use for example: A personal computer. Now, while you yourself might be well informed about the market and build your own, the vast majority of any given business's potential customers aren't. Advertising is how you reach them.
And then of course, the perspective of the website: They pay actual people actual money to write their content. That money doesn't come in when people don't pay to view it, but it DOES have to come from somewhere. Thus, advertising works suitably.
If some websites are getting tired of adblock, then instead of using anti-adblock scripts (which people create filters to work around these all the time, see the adblock forum) they might try doing the sensible thing and stop using assfucking annoying ads. Either that or if the acceptable ads don't pay enough, then show the regular annoying ads to people who don't use adblock and show acceptable ads to adblock users. Either that or they get nothing at all from adblock users who will either simply opt for a competitor site that has similar content or just find a way to circumvent their anti-adblock script.
Even Google, who is in many respects the king of internet advertising and likely gains the most from it, is trying to get the ad industry to stop with these crap tactics.
My understanding is that any app written for Windows 10 can run in either mobile or desktop mode... and no doubt the built in ones (mail, web, Office) will cover most initial needs.
They have to be re-written as a universal app, which can't quite do all of the same things that a normal app can do. Furthermore, it has to be distributed through the Microsoft app store, which means taking a 30% cut off of revenue.
Do some developers go that route? Yeah, but I don't think you'll see mass adoption. The reason why is because most developers these days no longer write apps for desktop operating systems. If they want to write an app for desktop users, they create web apps that you interact with in your web browser.
Another problem I see with Continuum though is that it necessitates carrying some kind of a dock with you. I can't think of many people who would do that. For that kind of thing, I actually bought a Surface Pro 4, which I use for work, and unlike Continuum it WILL run everything, and it will run it fast too.
Yes. There is economic disincentive to reuseability if you are a manufacturer. Why build one rocket when you can build 20?
There is if you're the only manufacturer. But what if your competitor starts offering a lower price? Well then you might want to find some ways to lower your own costs so that you can offer an even lower price. This is actually one of the wonderful things about capitalism is that it encourages people to find more practical ways of doing things.
And believe it or not, SpaceX does in fact have multiple competitors, though most of them aren't private sector, rather they're foreign governments (i.e. Russia, India.)
Last I checked, news implies recent and at least somewhat peculiar events. This has been happening for 14 years now. Does there need to be a way to fight it? Yeah, probably, but I really doubt any politician is going to sponsor any kind of bill that might in any seem likely to trigger another 9/11.
Anyways the point is, I sincerely doubt the guy was stopped just for being a Muslim, and the media is being extremely disingenuous for suggesting otherwise.
Probably because you can never have nice things if you always had to ask before you made them. Imagine if Sony had to ask permission to create betamax, I guarantee you that the government would have said "Oh, copyright infringement tool. Nope."
Most of the time, perceived risks (or rather, doom and gloom dystopias) never materialize.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't bother with GP (PopeRatzo.) I've debated with him on this and other economic issues before, and he seems to create his own definitions for common economic terms based on absolutely nothing, (my guess is sourced from something akin to urban dictionary) and then insists that his definition is the actual definition.
I'd mod you up for accuracy if you had the points, as very few people on Slashdot seem to understand what these terms mean (i.e. frequently confusing the terms socialism and welfare, or citing patent or copyright abuse as examples of the free market at work, when that couldn't be further from the truth.)
Why is that being modded down? The copyright gods demand blood. This person is in violation.. Just read that little notice on the first or second page... "All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form..."
Nobody modded him down. He's from Gay Nigger Association of America. I'm not joking, or trolling, or trying to be racist, that's the actual name of the group he represents, more details about them here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
He gets down modded so much that all of his posts are -1 right out the gate.
I still disagree.
Your argument essentially amounts to "it's not awful, because the last one was worse." Just because the last one was worse doesn't mean the current one isn't bad.
So why are you singling out the Chinese government
You might want to go re-read my original reply to this thread because I pretty clearly didn't.
I never said it was a great government
I used awful to describe it, and you disagreed many times.
Is it? I think it's obvious that I understand the government a bit better than he does. After all, the fact that he referred the federal government as "the fed" should be pretty self explanatory.
I like how you repeatedly identify a government that is well known to suppress freedom of speech and very violently and brutally kill political dissidents as somehow not being an awful government.
But go ahead.
Remember, back then, only white male landowners were allowed to vote.
The reason they did that was because at the time they had no other way to make sure you lived in the district that you were voting in. Also you didn't exactly have to own a huge parcel of land, you just had to own any piece of real property that had your name on it. By doing that, you were basically able to prove that in fact you were a lawful resident and thus could legally vote.
And by the way, back then it was common for just about everybody to own land, and the reason why is because some 90+ percent of the population were all farmers. That didn't mean they were rich by any stretch though, as in fact most farmers were poor.
How is the Chinese government "awful"? They've drastically increased the standard of living in that country over the past few decades, and turned it into a major world economic power.
Uh huh. The same can also be said about Nazi Germany. What are you getting at here?
You've obviously not experienced the inner workings of the Fed.
The Fed isn't a government entity.
Not saying it didn't happen, but I think it's suspect. It's possible that it's a "false flag"
No, this is somewhat typical in Eastern countries, i.e. professional malware software companies pay system integrators to install crap on their systems. This letter itself looks like it was written by somebody from China (most of the spammers there learn English in chat sessions, i.e. selling gold in World of Warcraft, so they pick up a lot of the crap habits that people have in those places, hence this letter is full of shit speak, i.e. instead of "you" they say "u", or other things like often saying hehe or haha when something isn't at all funny; note the "Hah." at the end of the paragraph.)
Anyways if you've ever heard of those incidents where anything from flash drives, phones, laptops, etc, have come with malware out of the factory, it's usually because some spammer paid off somebody with the ability to add it to the master images, and that person pockets the money.
There is no perfect government, but given how awful what we have is I for one would be willing to risk something new.
Awful? No, awful is how I'd describe governments like that of Venezuela or China. I'd describe ours using a word like frustrating, but frustration is a feeling that will always exist when interacting with any kind of large entity, (better known as a bureaucracy) and no matter how "direct democratic" you make it, that will never change.
Because his arguments match all of about 0% with reality he's probably one of those "I don't like the private sector because megacorps are evil and therefore the government does it best" types who have been reading too many cyberpunk novels in his parent's basement. They've been coming out of the woodwork a lot since SpaceX made a pretty historic spaceflight achievement.
The tough on crime crowd, also known as the board of directors of for-profit prisons
Actually the people who put the biggest lobbying pressure on being "tough on crime" are the prison guard unions, and indeed, there's a lot of scandal and coverup involved in it too.
http://mic.com/articles/41531/...
http://www.nationalreview.com/...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
In fact, in a lot of states they're the biggest one pushing against legalization of Marijuana. Why? Because it gives them LOTS of job security, perhaps more so than any other crime. But, don't let the pro union types hear this, or else you'll get an earful about how unions are in it to protect the working man...
That is why God created search engines.
Uh...You mean like the 1990's era search engines that rank results based on keywords? Who are you, Rip Van Winkle? With modern search engines you aren't likely to be found that way as they tend to rank pages based on how well people like them. If nobody hears about your product to begin with, then how are they going to like it?
Horseshit. You are totally ignoring that other metric they use to get money... Namely investors.
Are you dumb, or high? I can't tell. If none of the above, then I'm sorry, but I can't help you, nor can anybody else for that matter.
Hmm...The Spooks too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I guess it happens all the time.
I wonder how long before Google becomes genericided.
That probably won't happen unless somebody else can own their own google domain name, which the use of the trademark makes explicit reference to. Since only one entity can own it, that's not likely to ever happen.
This is likewise why Microsoft is trying, rather unsuccessfully, to push people to say "bing it", which appears in in-show product placements, or "bing and decide", which appears in their commercials. They wouldn't do either if they felt they could ever lose the trademark.
I first read the headline like: Missing champion skier inches near crashed drone, as if it was a search and rescue drone that crashed while looking for him.
Well you never know, they might overturn it. So what if somebody writes the word FUCK on their license plate? Maybe they're a pornstar and they want people to know it.
In fact I even think the FCC should drop its decency rules as well for the same reason. Does that mean we'll start seeing porn channels on the terrestrial channels? Well, no, given that cable channels don't do that, and they even filter out swear words when they aren't under any obligation to do either. But the reason the FCC decency rules should go the way of the dodo is because some really good shows like Game of Thrones could never be on the air.
I always thought it stood for ÜPS, as in "oops", because that's what seems to happen a lot with the packages they send me.
I personally, consciously support advertising because I recognize the the value from both the perspective of the advertiser and the website. However I still use adblock because the way these ads work is just downright annoying, but, I leave the acceptable ads option turned on to enable the ones that aren't.
Consider the perspective of the sponsor: When you have a new product you're trying to sell, you need a way to communicate with your customer that it is in fact available for them to buy. Take something you obviously use for example: A personal computer. Now, while you yourself might be well informed about the market and build your own, the vast majority of any given business's potential customers aren't. Advertising is how you reach them.
And then of course, the perspective of the website: They pay actual people actual money to write their content. That money doesn't come in when people don't pay to view it, but it DOES have to come from somewhere. Thus, advertising works suitably.
If some websites are getting tired of adblock, then instead of using anti-adblock scripts (which people create filters to work around these all the time, see the adblock forum) they might try doing the sensible thing and stop using assfucking annoying ads. Either that or if the acceptable ads don't pay enough, then show the regular annoying ads to people who don't use adblock and show acceptable ads to adblock users. Either that or they get nothing at all from adblock users who will either simply opt for a competitor site that has similar content or just find a way to circumvent their anti-adblock script.
Even Google, who is in many respects the king of internet advertising and likely gains the most from it, is trying to get the ad industry to stop with these crap tactics.
My understanding is that any app written for Windows 10 can run in either mobile or desktop mode... and no doubt the built in ones (mail, web, Office) will cover most initial needs.
They have to be re-written as a universal app, which can't quite do all of the same things that a normal app can do. Furthermore, it has to be distributed through the Microsoft app store, which means taking a 30% cut off of revenue.
Do some developers go that route? Yeah, but I don't think you'll see mass adoption. The reason why is because most developers these days no longer write apps for desktop operating systems. If they want to write an app for desktop users, they create web apps that you interact with in your web browser.
Another problem I see with Continuum though is that it necessitates carrying some kind of a dock with you. I can't think of many people who would do that. For that kind of thing, I actually bought a Surface Pro 4, which I use for work, and unlike Continuum it WILL run everything, and it will run it fast too.
Yes. There is economic disincentive to reuseability if you are a manufacturer. Why build one rocket when you can build 20?
There is if you're the only manufacturer. But what if your competitor starts offering a lower price? Well then you might want to find some ways to lower your own costs so that you can offer an even lower price. This is actually one of the wonderful things about capitalism is that it encourages people to find more practical ways of doing things.
And believe it or not, SpaceX does in fact have multiple competitors, though most of them aren't private sector, rather they're foreign governments (i.e. Russia, India.)
When a hugely popular politician
Politician means somebody who makes public policy decisions. Trump has never held such a position.
Last I checked, news implies recent and at least somewhat peculiar events. This has been happening for 14 years now. Does there need to be a way to fight it? Yeah, probably, but I really doubt any politician is going to sponsor any kind of bill that might in any seem likely to trigger another 9/11.
Anyways the point is, I sincerely doubt the guy was stopped just for being a Muslim, and the media is being extremely disingenuous for suggesting otherwise.
Probably because you can never have nice things if you always had to ask before you made them. Imagine if Sony had to ask permission to create betamax, I guarantee you that the government would have said "Oh, copyright infringement tool. Nope."
Most of the time, perceived risks (or rather, doom and gloom dystopias) never materialize.