How do you get that it's punishment before conviction? Is it not then punishment before conviction if someone has to sell their car or other property to post bail?
If they specifically *make* you sell your car to post bail then yes... Otherwise bail is merely a monetary incentive for a person not to skip out on court. i.e. the person is punished *IF* they skip out on court.
Our government is nothing more than a proxy for large corporations to use to "compete" Google is gaining strength fast, and those companies that have deep connections in DC are likely the ones who are ultimately pulling the levers. I find it interesting though, that from my perspective, conservatives seem to be very anti-Google and pro-MS. Not sure why, nor do I know if it's even true.. just seems that way to me.
But by and large the media companies and communication companies seem to be very strong these days.. and Google is a threat to them, so it doesn't surprise me that there is a government "investigation" happening.
Yes, all cool... Until they are hacked by a random foreign nation that'll have detailed information about all US soldiers.
I still don't see why they made the switch from stone tablets to paper. Used to be it took 5 guys to haul away one mans medical records, now 1!!! man can come in an make off with literally hundreds if not thousands of files!!!!
People are anxious to see her fall, for the simple reasons that she is unbearably unintelligent, and she's equally prideful. It's like a person speeding on a twisting road in the mountains. You know there's gonna be a crash, you just don't want the nation in the back seat when it happens.
Ah but isn't that the crux of why corps are afraid of unions in the first place. Let's unionize your scenario.. That neighborhood kids who spends hours mowing your lawn for $20 is now unionized with all the other lawn mowers, and since your big and rich let's assume you have dozens of lawns that need to be mowed. Now they are demanding $30 to mow each lawn. You can either get out there yourself and mow a dozen lawns or pay the kid the fair amount because all the other mowers are tired of being underpaid as well.
The truth of the matter is unions equal consequences for corporations who underpay employees.. of COURSE they don't want you to unionize.. it makes you easy to replace, but it's a hell of a lot harder to replace and retrain hundreds if not thousands of people. Unions are good, to a degree, but there must be balance otherwise you end up with unions screwing over the corporations.. as a matter of fact, the real value of that a company has for it's employees only comes out IF there's unionization.
In at-will states, they don't have to provide a reason to fire you. Just like you don't have to give a reason to quit.
In what states are you required by law to give a reason to quit? At-will states are just sucking corporate c#$k.. "at will" states just means corps can fire you with no strings while things stay just as they always have been for workers.
Just be hopeful that one day you aren't starving and asking someone like yourself for help... While your ideology is intellectually sound, it lacks any shred of humanity. You're thinking could easily be replaced with a machine's.
I'm sorry but China is shady as hell... and no one is claiming that X country is innocent, but come on... China has been at the forefront and behind the scenes of a great number of cyber attacks lately. The words "I think he doth protest too much" comes to mind.
Nevermind the fact that the gaming community was practically begging for D3. As opposed to the Halo gaming community which is scratching their heads wondering why another one is even necessary. When it comes to Bliz and MS they're both doing it for the money but Bliz also seems to just do what it wants as opposed to being galley slaves saying "yes sir.... we'd be happy do another Halo"/pointsguntohead
Just be sure we're up on the latest copyright laws from alien worlds. We wouldn't want to get some giant metallic radiation sphere orbiting our planet as a cease and desist order!
I f you wanted rid of Osama bin Laden, then do it properly. "Accidentally killed"? "Buried at sea"? Yeah, right. You didn't think that maybe - just, *maybe* - it might have been a good idea to do it properly, have some proper justice, and close the book finally on the guy?
You fucked up, America, and no amount of shouting and chest-beating is going to fix it. You shouldn't be proud of it. Ask the Israelis why.
I'm curious as to what your idea of "do it properly" was?
I can't even imagine the kind of crap Disney would pull with "Seal Team 6"
/announcer voice
"When the a cute little Eskimo boy's village is threatened by an evil (russian) mastermind threatening to destroy the Arctic with his oil drilling, the boy finds help the only way he knows how... *cue music and seal sounds* A grand adventure. A story of companionship and peril. Walt Disney Pictures in cooperation with the United States Navy presents: Seal Team 6"
The more I read about the brain the more I see a future where we're tailoring "specialized" people who might process specific types of information with vast superiority while debilitating themselves in other areas. I could see area's where say an engineer would have highly developed logical/mathmatical ability while maybe gimping himself in auditory processing or something. Which actually seems something like self induced autism.
The definition of insanity is repeating the same process repeatedly and expecting different results.
and yet you're the one who wants to go back to a Laissez-faire style of government. Even noting of the corruption that will occur. Ironically it was regulation that took down the rail barons.
You're the one who wants to give the government more power. Enforce laws on their intent, stop making new laws, simplify the laws and get out of everyone's business.
Is that what you took from it? I seem to recall mentioning integrity of public servants and regulation being beneficial
Yes, something like the corruption around the early railroad would reoccur if we didn't enforce laws, but the American people will not allow corporations to control the country without holding the reigns of the government today.
You know what.. the American people ARE allowing the corporations control the government. The solution is not to dismantle or weaken the government, but to reduce corporate influence.
The reason we wont is because there are so many people like you against it. Giving the government power is still giving it to corporations. Take it from the government and act like groups of people in a local environment with ties to other local groups instead of one massive broken hoard. When companies try to take power that doesn't belong to them the people have the power to stop it as long as the companies do not wield the power of government.
and how exactly do people stop abusive monopolistic practice.. without government to represent them? Are you going to start up on the virtues of the free market system? Because the free market certainly can't be corrupted in any way, right? The only and I mean ONLY thing that's going to stop corruption of the system in placing integrity in the system, because a system only works how it's supposed to work when you have people actively trying to make it work instead of trying to circumvent what it's trying to accomplish.
If we keep going your route we can keep dealing with politicians creating laws trying to force us to give our money to companies they designate. Health care bill? Military contracts? Lessening government power is the only way to slow the forced filtering of our money to the companies you want to stop.
As opposed to your route of having the corporations just abuse us with no recourse other than maybe some feeble grass roots uprising. You seem to be confused as to who is the corrupting influence here. Money is the corrupter and the corporations have the money. You say government is corrupt when it's the corps placing people there to corrupt it.. and your solution is to dismantle or weaken what the corps want out of their way in the first place.
The government is supposed to represent the people.. and it's representing the corporations because they're placing their own representatives in there.
I disagree. Regulation is beneficial, but what we are lacking are public servants who have the integrity to actually serve the public good. Allowing corporations free reign because they corrupt is a rather backwards argument. Corporations corrupt *to get* free reign, so suggesting that as a solution just leads me to believe that you're part of the corruption.
I find it interesting that you equate a society that doesn't "forcibly redistribute wealth" as ethical, without explaining WHY you believe it to be ethical. Note: Be careful of the can of worms you open when talking about wealth and "ethics" or as I'm sure you're alluding to "work ethics"
Slashdot Mirror
How do you get that it's punishment before conviction? Is it not then punishment before conviction if someone has to sell their car or other property to post bail?
If they specifically *make* you sell your car to post bail then yes... Otherwise bail is merely a monetary incentive for a person not to skip out on court. i.e. the person is punished *IF* they skip out on court.
In Soviet America the Government is the Citizens!!!!!! ...ok let me get back to you on that.
Our government is nothing more than a proxy for large corporations to use to "compete" Google is gaining strength fast, and those companies that have deep connections in DC are likely the ones who are ultimately pulling the levers. I find it interesting though, that from my perspective, conservatives seem to be very anti-Google and pro-MS. Not sure why, nor do I know if it's even true.. just seems that way to me. But by and large the media companies and communication companies seem to be very strong these days.. and Google is a threat to them, so it doesn't surprise me that there is a government "investigation" happening.
How about minimum average dowload speed given normal conditions over the period of say a month...
Yes, all cool... Until they are hacked by a random foreign nation that'll have detailed information about all US soldiers.
I still don't see why they made the switch from stone tablets to paper. Used to be it took 5 guys to haul away one mans medical records, now 1!!! man can come in an make off with literally hundreds if not thousands of files!!!!
Talk about the gift that keeps on giving!
Getting those little tags on em is a bitch!
People are anxious to see her fall, for the simple reasons that she is unbearably unintelligent, and she's equally prideful. It's like a person speeding on a twisting road in the mountains. You know there's gonna be a crash, you just don't want the nation in the back seat when it happens.
Ah but isn't that the crux of why corps are afraid of unions in the first place. Let's unionize your scenario.. That neighborhood kids who spends hours mowing your lawn for $20 is now unionized with all the other lawn mowers, and since your big and rich let's assume you have dozens of lawns that need to be mowed. Now they are demanding $30 to mow each lawn. You can either get out there yourself and mow a dozen lawns or pay the kid the fair amount because all the other mowers are tired of being underpaid as well. The truth of the matter is unions equal consequences for corporations who underpay employees.. of COURSE they don't want you to unionize.. it makes you easy to replace, but it's a hell of a lot harder to replace and retrain hundreds if not thousands of people. Unions are good, to a degree, but there must be balance otherwise you end up with unions screwing over the corporations.. as a matter of fact, the real value of that a company has for it's employees only comes out IF there's unionization.
In at-will states, they don't have to provide a reason to fire you. Just like you don't have to give a reason to quit.
In what states are you required by law to give a reason to quit? At-will states are just sucking corporate c#$k.. "at will" states just means corps can fire you with no strings while things stay just as they always have been for workers.
What, you don't expect them to simply copy legitimate data, do you?
Perhaps they were worried about being sued for copyright infringement!
Just be hopeful that one day you aren't starving and asking someone like yourself for help... While your ideology is intellectually sound, it lacks any shred of humanity. You're thinking could easily be replaced with a machine's.
I'm sorry but China is shady as hell... and no one is claiming that X country is innocent, but come on... China has been at the forefront and behind the scenes of a great number of cyber attacks lately. The words "I think he doth protest too much" comes to mind.
Nevermind the fact that the gaming community was practically begging for D3. As opposed to the Halo gaming community which is scratching their heads wondering why another one is even necessary. When it comes to Bliz and MS they're both doing it for the money but Bliz also seems to just do what it wants as opposed to being galley slaves saying "yes sir.... we'd be happy do another Halo" /pointsguntohead
You heard it here first! MoooooooooooooooooooCHOMP!
The 1990's called, they want their fanboy back.
..but I can't because I'm already gone. I got the rapture on preorder.
Apparently "ni hao" means "G'day"
Just be sure we're up on the latest copyright laws from alien worlds. We wouldn't want to get some giant metallic radiation sphere orbiting our planet as a cease and desist order!
I f you wanted rid of Osama bin Laden, then do it properly. "Accidentally killed"? "Buried at sea"? Yeah, right. You didn't think that maybe - just, *maybe* - it might have been a good idea to do it properly, have some proper justice, and close the book finally on the guy?
You fucked up, America, and no amount of shouting and chest-beating is going to fix it. You shouldn't be proud of it. Ask the Israelis why.
I'm curious as to what your idea of "do it properly" was?
I can't even imagine the kind of crap Disney would pull with "Seal Team 6"
/announcer voice
"When the a cute little Eskimo boy's village is threatened by an evil (russian) mastermind threatening to destroy the Arctic with his oil drilling, the boy finds help the only way he knows how... *cue music and seal sounds* A grand adventure. A story of companionship and peril. Walt Disney Pictures in cooperation with the United States Navy presents: Seal Team 6"
The more I read about the brain the more I see a future where we're tailoring "specialized" people who might process specific types of information with vast superiority while debilitating themselves in other areas. I could see area's where say an engineer would have highly developed logical/mathmatical ability while maybe gimping himself in auditory processing or something. Which actually seems something like self induced autism.
The definition of insanity is repeating the same process repeatedly and expecting different results.
and yet you're the one who wants to go back to a Laissez-faire style of government. Even noting of the corruption that will occur. Ironically it was regulation that took down the rail barons.
You're the one who wants to give the government more power. Enforce laws on their intent, stop making new laws, simplify the laws and get out of everyone's business.
Is that what you took from it? I seem to recall mentioning integrity of public servants and regulation being beneficial
Yes, something like the corruption around the early railroad would reoccur if we didn't enforce laws, but the American people will not allow corporations to control the country without holding the reigns of the government today.
You know what.. the American people ARE allowing the corporations control the government. The solution is not to dismantle or weaken the government, but to reduce corporate influence.
The reason we wont is because there are so many people like you against it. Giving the government power is still giving it to corporations. Take it from the government and act like groups of people in a local environment with ties to other local groups instead of one massive broken hoard. When companies try to take power that doesn't belong to them the people have the power to stop it as long as the companies do not wield the power of government.
and how exactly do people stop abusive monopolistic practice.. without government to represent them? Are you going to start up on the virtues of the free market system? Because the free market certainly can't be corrupted in any way, right? The only and I mean ONLY thing that's going to stop corruption of the system in placing integrity in the system, because a system only works how it's supposed to work when you have people actively trying to make it work instead of trying to circumvent what it's trying to accomplish.
If we keep going your route we can keep dealing with politicians creating laws trying to force us to give our money to companies they designate. Health care bill? Military contracts? Lessening government power is the only way to slow the forced filtering of our money to the companies you want to stop.
As opposed to your route of having the corporations just abuse us with no recourse other than maybe some feeble grass roots uprising. You seem to be confused as to who is the corrupting influence here. Money is the corrupter and the corporations have the money. You say government is corrupt when it's the corps placing people there to corrupt it.. and your solution is to dismantle or weaken what the corps want out of their way in the first place.
The government is supposed to represent the people.. and it's representing the corporations because they're placing their own representatives in there.
I disagree. Regulation is beneficial, but what we are lacking are public servants who have the integrity to actually serve the public good. Allowing corporations free reign because they corrupt is a rather backwards argument. Corporations corrupt *to get* free reign, so suggesting that as a solution just leads me to believe that you're part of the corruption.
I find it interesting that you equate a society that doesn't "forcibly redistribute wealth" as ethical, without explaining WHY you believe it to be ethical. Note: Be careful of the can of worms you open when talking about wealth and "ethics" or as I'm sure you're alluding to "work ethics"