Thanks. This is proof that any time anyone says something is left wing, someone will post that it's "strongly right wing". I wasn't sure it would happen with this China post, but you came through. I can now confidently look forward to someday hearing how Che Guevara is strongly right wing.
Also 72 virgins, luxury accommodations, white sand beaches, monkey butlers, gourmet food -- dine with your favorite celebrities! It's truly a workers' paradise.
In other words, "We have this story we're telling about Steve Bannon having impure thoughts about racial minorities. If you believe this story with all your heart, you can easily see how any statement he makes is a product of those impure thoughts. Also, as we all know, having impure thoughts about racial minorities is the worst sin imaginable."
If you're wetting your pants every day because you believe made-up scary stories about future Trump Administration actions, China wants you. They have a special story they want to tell you, and they know that after you hear it, you'll do exactly what they want you to. You're the perfect recruit. Apply now.
How does the store manage returns? What happens when a customer puts an item back on the shelf in the wrong place?
Have guys working there to stock shelves and handle weird exception conditions.
What digital security measures are they taking? (not just on the database side, but criminals with RFID scanners would surely target a place like this)
Dealing with elaborate theft schemes isn't the main thing that stores worry about. Maybe the answer is: "buy theft insurance".
People who steal stuff from stores generally come up with elaborate, multi-step plans?
Supermarkets are structured differently than bank vaults. Why? Because stores are structured to facilitate trade and banks are structured to secure things.
So I'm going to be a naysayer here (and yes I watched the video)
1. How do you control age restricted materials?
By not selling them. Obviously a better choice is for everyone to stop policing their neighbors' lives, but...
2. How do you control for multiple people co-ordinating to select a complete set of goods?
By not opening the stores in high crime neighborhoods. But mostly by not worrying about it. You know who is in the store and presumably you have cameras.
3. How are they going to use the huge amount of personal information they will collect on what you buy?
Add it to the info Amazon already has on what you buy from Amazon.
4. You can't pay with cash.
Shut down Internet commerce. You can't (generally) buy things online with cash.
5. You have to have a smart phone plus the Amazon App. So it verges on "company store" mentality and all the negative connotations of "company towns"
Apparently you don't know what company stores and company towns are. Hint: it's not when there are lots of competing stores around.
6. You can't come in and browse to see if you want to shop at the location before committing.
... to download Amazon's free app.
7. How do they control for turning your phone off after entering the store (or the battery dies)?
Same way self checkout handles exception conditions.
Fake news... it's a problem because it's being systematically and purposely used to poison discourse and destroy the entire political system of your country
For a lot of us, it was poisoned to death at least 10 years ago. And we said so at the time, and no one cared.
A cataclysmic one, for which the whole world will pay dearly.
Speaking of "truth", please explain how you know the future.
Like I'm going to go "have a reasonable discussion with someone I don't agree with".
How would anyone know whether they disagreed with you? A "reasonable discussion" requires explanations of your thoughts. A list of half-articulated observations isn't something people can "reasonably" discuss.
I'm sure some people will react and emote with you though. And congratulate themselves for being righteous because... well, mostly because they enjoy thinking they're righteous and better than other people.
Ahh yes. "My side is sensible. The other side is extreme/insane/[insert slur here]." That's some well-reasoned analysis there.
Does your side actually do things to help the people whose votes you want? Maybe telling them to vote for you because you helped them might work better than telling them to vote for you because otherwise you'll call them names.
Given a different system, people might have voted differently. Hillary might or might not have won in that case. Anyone can make up whatever story they want about something that might have happened but didn't.
She still lost because people don't like her -- the "more than" or "less than" someone else doesn't change that.
The "fake news" narrative is getting old. She didn't lose because of "fake news", she lost because people don't like her and because poor folks don't see Democrats in power and think "my problems will be solved" any more.
No one is going to vote any different based on telling stories about Russian influence, even if they're true stories. And you won't be able to censor the Internet effectively. If you try to, it will backfire on you.
If you want the next Democrat candidate to win, here's a suggestion for Democrats: help people. Don't just pick fights. Don't just point and jeer. Actually do something to genuinely help. Do it with a motivation to help rather than to get even with people you hate and maybe help someone in the process. Help Americans to get votes from Americans. Help a broad, inclusive population of people if you want votes from a broad population of people.
If you don't want Democrats to win, then just keep fighting. Keep calling everyone a racist or some other name. Cater exclusively to SJW crybullys who want to scream about transgenger microaggressions and cultural appropriation. Keep doing nothing for regular people. And keep telling yourself you lost because of "fake news".
That's sort of near "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".
It's a living, breathing document. So it means (or, in these cases, doesn't mean) whatever powerful people want it to mean today. Tomorrow it may mean the exact opposite. Because power. And because shut up.
Trump will use this new government power to determine which news is legitimate and which is "fake". Perhaps he will send the IRS after his enemies in the "fake" news camp, just like the Obama Administration did with the Tea Party. I hope you're not on the donor lists the IRS will be demanding from those organizations that Trump doesn't like. If you are, you better have all your financial records in order.
The FEC may also want to talk to you if your donations funded any "Citizens United" style communications to voters about Mr. Trump or his close allies. Hope you didn't make a criminal mistake by donating to the Wisconsin recount efforts or supporting them materially.
No, it's just transparently self-serving. Try not to wet your pants every day from now until 2021. You don't know the future. Stop making up (and believing) "scary" imaginary stories that take place in the future.
If electors were going to choose based on their own judgment, then It makes no sense for them to choose a corrupt person like Hillary. She has nothing going for her other than a vote count -- the very thing electors are being told to disregard in their own states.
Yes. Phony outrage about Trump statements is phony. When the press purposely goes along with the phony drama, they're intentionally faking news. Most political news is this sort of intentional dishonesty.
Just because you think some tax is "extortionistic" doesn't mean it is, and if you don't like the taxes you pay, then convince enough of your fellow citizens to elect a different government.
Done.
But quit pretending that your personal objections are universal or that you have some special right not to.pay taxes beyond your fellow citizens. It's "no taxation without representation", not simply "no taxation".
I'm going to keep telling people that it's wrong to want to spend money on yourself that other people earned. Thanks for the advice though.
Free people voluntarily choose to establish a government because it serves their interests. They want a street, or a fire department or a police force, but it actually makes the most sense to pool resources and create these things in common rather than for individuals or small groups to try to go it alone. So governments that are voluntarily established by free people actually serve those people.
The governments we have now serve special interests. Infrastructure projects aren't chosen based on the maximum public good for the minimum cost. Propose an infrastructure project that serves the people paying for it and is constructed to minimize costs rather than to pay off contractors and union workers and I'll support it. But that's illegal in the US when the Feds provide any of the money.
Civilization wouldn't exist...
Stop stealing from people in the name of "civilization". We can have civilization without paying extra extortion money to special interests.
Yes it is. You can make the case that it isn't (very) bad if it nets out positive for almost everyone. But you haven't made that case.
There's always a huge infrastucture wish list. Someone will always point to a supposed benefit for someone. All the projects seem great if you forget that you took the money from the people who earned it so you could spend it on yourself/your priorities.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks. This is proof that any time anyone says something is left wing, someone will post that it's "strongly right wing". I wasn't sure it would happen with this China post, but you came through. I can now confidently look forward to someday hearing how Che Guevara is strongly right wing.
$1 million signing bonuses
Also 72 virgins, luxury accommodations, white sand beaches, monkey butlers, gourmet food -- dine with your favorite celebrities! It's truly a workers' paradise.
In other words, "We have this story we're telling about Steve Bannon having impure thoughts about racial minorities. If you believe this story with all your heart, you can easily see how any statement he makes is a product of those impure thoughts. Also, as we all know, having impure thoughts about racial minorities is the worst sin imaginable."
If you're wetting your pants every day because you believe made-up scary stories about future Trump Administration actions, China wants you. They have a special story they want to tell you, and they know that after you hear it, you'll do exactly what they want you to. You're the perfect recruit. Apply now.
Good questions and I'll add to them..
How do they apply coupons?
By not taking coupons.
How does the store manage returns?
What happens when a customer puts an item back on the shelf in the wrong place?
Have guys working there to stock shelves and handle weird exception conditions.
What digital security measures are they taking? (not just on the database side, but criminals with RFID scanners would surely target a place like this)
Dealing with elaborate theft schemes isn't the main thing that stores worry about. Maybe the answer is: "buy theft insurance".
People who steal stuff from stores generally come up with elaborate, multi-step plans?
Supermarkets are structured differently than bank vaults. Why? Because stores are structured to facilitate trade and banks are structured to secure things.
So I'm going to be a naysayer here (and yes I watched the video)
1. How do you control age restricted materials?
By not selling them. Obviously a better choice is for everyone to stop policing their neighbors' lives, but...
2. How do you control for multiple people co-ordinating to select a complete set of goods?
By not opening the stores in high crime neighborhoods. But mostly by not worrying about it. You know who is in the store and presumably you have cameras.
3. How are they going to use the huge amount of personal information they will collect on what you buy?
Add it to the info Amazon already has on what you buy from Amazon.
4. You can't pay with cash.
Shut down Internet commerce. You can't (generally) buy things online with cash.
5. You have to have a smart phone plus the Amazon App. So it verges on "company store" mentality and all the negative connotations of "company towns"
Apparently you don't know what company stores and company towns are. Hint: it's not when there are lots of competing stores around.
6. You can't come in and browse to see if you want to shop at the location before committing.
... to download Amazon's free app.
7. How do they control for turning your phone off after entering the store (or the battery dies)?
Same way self checkout handles exception conditions.
Fake news ... it's a problem because it's being systematically and purposely used to poison discourse and destroy the entire political system of your country
For a lot of us, it was poisoned to death at least 10 years ago. And we said so at the time, and no one cared.
A cataclysmic one, for which the whole world will pay dearly.
Speaking of "truth", please explain how you know the future.
Like I'm going to go "have a reasonable discussion with someone I don't agree with".
How would anyone know whether they disagreed with you? A "reasonable discussion" requires explanations of your thoughts. A list of half-articulated observations isn't something people can "reasonably" discuss.
I'm sure some people will react and emote with you though. And congratulate themselves for being righteous because ... well, mostly because they enjoy thinking they're righteous and better than other people.
Never fear, Mark Zuckerburg is working on it now! Soon all those propaganda stories will be replaced with paid advertisements.
Ahh yes. "My side is sensible. The other side is extreme/insane/[insert slur here]." That's some well-reasoned analysis there.
Does your side actually do things to help the people whose votes you want? Maybe telling them to vote for you because you helped them might work better than telling them to vote for you because otherwise you'll call them names.
Given a different system, people might have voted differently. Hillary might or might not have won in that case. Anyone can make up whatever story they want about something that might have happened but didn't.
She still lost because people don't like her -- the "more than" or "less than" someone else doesn't change that.
It's all Eastasia. We've always been at war with Eastasia.
The "fake news" narrative is getting old. She didn't lose because of "fake news", she lost because people don't like her and because poor folks don't see Democrats in power and think "my problems will be solved" any more.
No one is going to vote any different based on telling stories about Russian influence, even if they're true stories. And you won't be able to censor the Internet effectively. If you try to, it will backfire on you.
If you want the next Democrat candidate to win, here's a suggestion for Democrats: help people. Don't just pick fights. Don't just point and jeer. Actually do something to genuinely help. Do it with a motivation to help rather than to get even with people you hate and maybe help someone in the process. Help Americans to get votes from Americans. Help a broad, inclusive population of people if you want votes from a broad population of people.
If you don't want Democrats to win, then just keep fighting. Keep calling everyone a racist or some other name. Cater exclusively to SJW crybullys who want to scream about transgenger microaggressions and cultural appropriation. Keep doing nothing for regular people. And keep telling yourself you lost because of "fake news".
That's sort of near "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".
It's a living, breathing document. So it means (or, in these cases, doesn't mean) whatever powerful people want it to mean today. Tomorrow it may mean the exact opposite. Because power. And because shut up.
Trump will use this new government power to determine which news is legitimate and which is "fake". Perhaps he will send the IRS after his enemies in the "fake" news camp, just like the Obama Administration did with the Tea Party. I hope you're not on the donor lists the IRS will be demanding from those organizations that Trump doesn't like. If you are, you better have all your financial records in order.
The FEC may also want to talk to you if your donations funded any "Citizens United" style communications to voters about Mr. Trump or his close allies. Hope you didn't make a criminal mistake by donating to the Wisconsin recount efforts or supporting them materially.
Big Government power sure is awesome, isn't it?
There's no evidence anyone has any such "plan".
No, it's just transparently self-serving. Try not to wet your pants every day from now until 2021. You don't know the future. Stop making up (and believing) "scary" imaginary stories that take place in the future.
Nigel Farage
If electors were going to choose based on their own judgment, then It makes no sense for them to choose a corrupt person like Hillary. She has nothing going for her other than a vote count -- the very thing electors are being told to disregard in their own states.
Yes. Phony outrage about Trump statements is phony. When the press purposely goes along with the phony drama, they're intentionally faking news. Most political news is this sort of intentional dishonesty.
Just because you think some tax is "extortionistic" doesn't mean it is, and if you don't like the taxes you pay, then convince enough of your fellow citizens to elect a different government.
Done.
But quit pretending that your personal objections are universal or that you have some special right not to.pay taxes beyond your fellow citizens. It's "no taxation without representation", not simply "no taxation".
I'm going to keep telling people that it's wrong to want to spend money on yourself that other people earned. Thanks for the advice though.
The civilization is here. The people who built it are long dead. Why should you get paid over and over and over for their work?
Free people voluntarily choose to establish a government because it serves their interests. They want a street, or a fire department or a police force, but it actually makes the most sense to pool resources and create these things in common rather than for individuals or small groups to try to go it alone. So governments that are voluntarily established by free people actually serve those people.
The governments we have now serve special interests. Infrastructure projects aren't chosen based on the maximum public good for the minimum cost. Propose an infrastructure project that serves the people paying for it and is constructed to minimize costs rather than to pay off contractors and union workers and I'll support it. But that's illegal in the US when the Feds provide any of the money.
Civilization wouldn't exist ...
Stop stealing from people in the name of "civilization". We can have civilization without paying extra extortion money to special interests.
Yes it is. You can make the case that it isn't (very) bad if it nets out positive for almost everyone. But you haven't made that case.
There's always a huge infrastucture wish list. Someone will always point to a supposed benefit for someone. All the projects seem great if you forget that you took the money from the people who earned it so you could spend it on yourself/your priorities.