You completely missed the point. To continue with my analogy of a secure OS: In theory it can happen, but the reality is that there are too many variables that can't be managed 100%. It doesn't mean we shouldn't try -- it's a lofty goal to strive for, and giving up means that the other side wins by default -- but we will NEVER reach that point, and we need to recognize that and worry about mitigating the effects of a flawed system instead of expecting perfect performance. The founders recognized this and set certain limits in place to minimize the damage in the case of compromise, but obviously any system in continuous operation requires continuous improvements otherwise its weaknesses will continue to be exploited.
I don't think the hypothetical scissors would work... if it did, you could modulate the opening and closing and send information faster than light. The point doesn't have mass, but the scissors do, which is where the problem lies. For the tips of the scissors to move, that force has to be transmitted along the medium, the material from which they're crafted, and for the tips to move in conjunction with the closing force, you'd need a material of infinite strength and zero elasticity. At least that's my understanding...
Even if you could get them out, how do you keep the next ones from taking their place?
Keeping money out of politics is like keeping a virus out of a computer (or a body), but worse, because people intentionally let money in. It's an arms race where there's no incentive for people with the means to fight back, and no means for the people with incentive.
Let me brag about my child by pretending to ask a question about his phenomenal abilities.
"What's the best way to display my son's trophies, giving prominence to the national championships while still maintaining visibility of the state and regional trophies?"
"What are some good books for a 6 year-old reading at a collegiate level?"
"Should I spank my toddler when he deliberately fudges the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem?"
Just because you miscalculate the duration of your fall doesn't mean the ground isn't there. I get what you're saying, but telling people to shut up when they're trying to express an important message will, in fact, result in people ignoring the end result while they're distracted by DWTS. Yes, it's better to be right, but it's better to have some warning than none at all. I'd rather know that there's a super cell capable of producing tornadoes on a given day than waiting to say anything until there's a tornado knocking at my front door. People can complain about false alarms all they want, but that's a problem with people who want absolute certainty when none exists. It's people failing to cope with reality, not reality failing to cope with people's expectations.
I'm pretty sure it would take a Constitutional amendment to preempt the taxation powers of individual states. The best you're gonna get is a voluntary collaboration of state governments, but good luck with that too, especially since some states don't have sales tax.
The only decent free streaming service that I'm aware of is Pandora. Which is great, when you don't want to micromanage what you're listening to (particularly since you can't). I subscribe to Rhapsody because I can create a playlist of exactly what songs I want to hear, listen to almost anything on a whim, and I don't have to have the songs on my phone first. Their library isn't exhaustive (whose is?), but it's pretty good for what you get, and certainly more than what I could store on my phone.
Well, the top 1% control 42% of the wealth, so the fact that they pay only 38% of the taxes shows a significant discrepancy right there.
But they also use a disproportionate share of public services. Take Apple, with police investigations for lost prototypes. Customs inspections to find counterfeit products, which preserves brand value. Police security at private functions for wealthy Americans, and police protection during hazardous events like peaceful protests by the plebes outside of their offices. The fact that streets/roads are mostly damaged by commercial vehicles, yet are mostly funded by things like fuel taxes where everyone pays their "fair share" except the people who cost the most. And then there's the issue that wealthy people write laws like the DMCA through their corporate vehicles, and then frequently engage in expensive and time consuming litigation in public courts. And the military, where those who can afford college are officers, and those who can't fight on the front lines. But hey, at least they get tuition assistance if they make it back alive, and 100% healthcare while they're in (cause it would be sorta fucked up if they had to pay for treatment of their own bullet wounds).
But sure. Let's pretend that even a 75% tax rate would make an appreciable difference in the quality of life of the wealthiest top 1% of Americans. People who are profiting on the backs of the bottom 50% (those who have to budget to afford groceries, gas, and rent) shouldn't be punished for their success! They shouldn't be enslaved to the poor and the middle class! Because it's nothing less than punishment and enslavement when the net annual income of the wealthy goes from what the average person earns in 10 lifetimes to what they earn in 7.5 lifetimes, or even something absurd like 1 lifetime.
What percentage of a persons income, no matter how rich, no matter if earned or trust fund baby, OR total wealth, do you think YOU are entitled to have redistributed away from them[?]
100%. No matter how rich (or poor), property rights are a social contract, not a natural right. Society owns everything; people just borrow it for a while.
Fuck no they weren't. That's just some crap fantasy your parents have. Thalidomide, DDT, the KKK, political assassinations, Cuyahoga River, Watergate, the red scare(s) and McCarthyism, stop, drop, and roll, Vietnam, Korea, AT&T, the oil crisis, the Bay of Pigs, lobotomies, legalized racism, and on and on.
Leave it to Beaver was an escape, not a documentary.
The government already has as the final say on everything -- the power -- when it comes to matters of commerce. So the question is not whether or not we give them power, but rather how it should be exercised and who benefits. I would rather have the government mandating basic minimum standards for broadband -- "net neutrality" -- than allowing corporations to collude and set their own definitions of what they want us to have. If left to their own devices, they will *always* go the most profitable route, as is their mandate, but the most profitable route is seldom the one which benefits the most people. Hence regulation.
You're so silly. There were never days where legal channels weren't corrupted and totally preferential toward those with the most money to throw at it. Things are actually much better than they've been by historical standards. You don't wind up in jail for missing a payment to a private entity on their say-so, for example.
Yes, but the Constitution limits what the political interests can filter. That, and your vote. Yes, you only have one vote, but that's probably more votes than you have with AT&T or Comcast.
Other way around. BIOS can boot into a UEFI environment. This (along with some device ID mimicry and device driver wizardry) is how one boots a generic PC into OSX.
I think Google would be subject to antitrust investigations as well, since they'd have vertical integration from the OS to the hardware (potentially) to the service. It would be very tempting to leverage this position, and could even be considered negligent if they didn't, which would open them to shareholder lawsuits.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Abu.
Exactly. Now if you assumed they shouted something like "Abu Akbar!" during the missile launch... that would be racist.
You completely missed the point. To continue with my analogy of a secure OS: In theory it can happen, but the reality is that there are too many variables that can't be managed 100%. It doesn't mean we shouldn't try -- it's a lofty goal to strive for, and giving up means that the other side wins by default -- but we will NEVER reach that point, and we need to recognize that and worry about mitigating the effects of a flawed system instead of expecting perfect performance. The founders recognized this and set certain limits in place to minimize the damage in the case of compromise, but obviously any system in continuous operation requires continuous improvements otherwise its weaknesses will continue to be exploited.
I don't think the hypothetical scissors would work... if it did, you could modulate the opening and closing and send information faster than light. The point doesn't have mass, but the scissors do, which is where the problem lies. For the tips of the scissors to move, that force has to be transmitted along the medium, the material from which they're crafted, and for the tips to move in conjunction with the closing force, you'd need a material of infinite strength and zero elasticity. At least that's my understanding...
I believe the word you were looking for is metrology.
Even if you could get them out, how do you keep the next ones from taking their place?
Keeping money out of politics is like keeping a virus out of a computer (or a body), but worse, because people intentionally let money in. It's an arms race where there's no incentive for people with the means to fight back, and no means for the people with incentive.
Same reason we don't call that 5-sided building in Virginia "The Lockheed Martin Military Complex."
Let me brag about my child by pretending to ask a question about his phenomenal abilities.
"What's the best way to display my son's trophies, giving prominence to the national championships while still maintaining visibility of the state and regional trophies?"
"What are some good books for a 6 year-old reading at a collegiate level?"
"Should I spank my toddler when he deliberately fudges the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem?"
Just because you miscalculate the duration of your fall doesn't mean the ground isn't there. I get what you're saying, but telling people to shut up when they're trying to express an important message will, in fact, result in people ignoring the end result while they're distracted by DWTS. Yes, it's better to be right, but it's better to have some warning than none at all. I'd rather know that there's a super cell capable of producing tornadoes on a given day than waiting to say anything until there's a tornado knocking at my front door. People can complain about false alarms all they want, but that's a problem with people who want absolute certainty when none exists. It's people failing to cope with reality, not reality failing to cope with people's expectations.
No, it's *subsidized* at a national level, but those funds don't come close to covering the total costs in most states.
I'm pretty sure it would take a Constitutional amendment to preempt the taxation powers of individual states. The best you're gonna get is a voluntary collaboration of state governments, but good luck with that too, especially since some states don't have sales tax.
I'm a programmer, and I play first person shooters. Not everybody likes to solve the same problems on their downtime as they do at work.
The search bar has made traversing menus obsolete. Just hit the Start key, type the first 3-4 letters of the program you want to run, and hit Enter.
The only decent free streaming service that I'm aware of is Pandora. Which is great, when you don't want to micromanage what you're listening to (particularly since you can't). I subscribe to Rhapsody because I can create a playlist of exactly what songs I want to hear, listen to almost anything on a whim, and I don't have to have the songs on my phone first. Their library isn't exhaustive (whose is?), but it's pretty good for what you get, and certainly more than what I could store on my phone.
Life was definitely rough before the invention of towels.
Well, the top 1% control 42% of the wealth, so the fact that they pay only 38% of the taxes shows a significant discrepancy right there.
But they also use a disproportionate share of public services. Take Apple, with police investigations for lost prototypes. Customs inspections to find counterfeit products, which preserves brand value. Police security at private functions for wealthy Americans, and police protection during hazardous events like peaceful protests by the plebes outside of their offices. The fact that streets/roads are mostly damaged by commercial vehicles, yet are mostly funded by things like fuel taxes where everyone pays their "fair share" except the people who cost the most. And then there's the issue that wealthy people write laws like the DMCA through their corporate vehicles, and then frequently engage in expensive and time consuming litigation in public courts. And the military, where those who can afford college are officers, and those who can't fight on the front lines. But hey, at least they get tuition assistance if they make it back alive, and 100% healthcare while they're in (cause it would be sorta fucked up if they had to pay for treatment of their own bullet wounds).
But sure. Let's pretend that even a 75% tax rate would make an appreciable difference in the quality of life of the wealthiest top 1% of Americans. People who are profiting on the backs of the bottom 50% (those who have to budget to afford groceries, gas, and rent) shouldn't be punished for their success! They shouldn't be enslaved to the poor and the middle class! Because it's nothing less than punishment and enslavement when the net annual income of the wealthy goes from what the average person earns in 10 lifetimes to what they earn in 7.5 lifetimes, or even something absurd like 1 lifetime.
What percentage of a persons income, no matter how rich, no matter if earned or trust fund baby, OR total wealth, do you think YOU are entitled to have redistributed away from them[?]
100%. No matter how rich (or poor), property rights are a social contract, not a natural right. Society owns everything; people just borrow it for a while.
I'm not sure, but keep it up -- she hasn't cheated on me yet!
Fuck no they weren't. That's just some crap fantasy your parents have. Thalidomide, DDT, the KKK, political assassinations, Cuyahoga River, Watergate, the red scare(s) and McCarthyism, stop, drop, and roll, Vietnam, Korea, AT&T, the oil crisis, the Bay of Pigs, lobotomies, legalized racism, and on and on.
Leave it to Beaver was an escape, not a documentary.
The government already has as the final say on everything -- the power -- when it comes to matters of commerce. So the question is not whether or not we give them power, but rather how it should be exercised and who benefits. I would rather have the government mandating basic minimum standards for broadband -- "net neutrality" -- than allowing corporations to collude and set their own definitions of what they want us to have. If left to their own devices, they will *always* go the most profitable route, as is their mandate, but the most profitable route is seldom the one which benefits the most people. Hence regulation.
You're so silly. There were never days where legal channels weren't corrupted and totally preferential toward those with the most money to throw at it. Things are actually much better than they've been by historical standards. You don't wind up in jail for missing a payment to a private entity on their say-so, for example.
Yes, but the Constitution limits what the political interests can filter. That, and your vote. Yes, you only have one vote, but that's probably more votes than you have with AT&T or Comcast.
Oh my god we're drinking people!
Which was all but useless for anyone who lived on base, which is everyone except those who got married (mostly by shotgun) before they joined.
Other way around. BIOS can boot into a UEFI environment. This (along with some device ID mimicry and device driver wizardry) is how one boots a generic PC into OSX.
I think Google would be subject to antitrust investigations as well, since they'd have vertical integration from the OS to the hardware (potentially) to the service. It would be very tempting to leverage this position, and could even be considered negligent if they didn't, which would open them to shareholder lawsuits.