This could easily be MUCH cheaper then going to the movie theater, especially if you add in drinks/snacks....
Eating Kraft macaroni and cheese at home is also much cheaper than going out to a high class restaurant. Your point? Watching a movie in the cinema is not the same as watching a movie at home, even though in both places you get a "movie". Just like horrible, boxed mac and cheese and a $60 angus steak are both "food". But if you can't see the difference then you deserve to pay more for less. If your family of four waits a few months the same movie will be on pay per view for $5, or on cable for the price of the subscription you're paying anyway.
Well Angelina Jolie said that we should listen to Zuckerberg on this...
Seriously though, it's not just human but also animal nature to "worship" the successful. While that used to be the big alpha male who always won his fights, and through humanity turned into the chieftain or the king who also always won his fights (after all, God shall protect the right)... in today's world we no longer value fighting so much, so we worship the ones set on a pedestal before us ("famous" people) and the ones who make a lot of money. Is that right? No. But it's how human brains are wired.
The government does not force telephone companies to turn over records. They ask them to. And the telephone company complies. Because if they don't, then the FBI sends goons around to seize the records. See - ultimately the FBI (ie the government) has to do the work. Since telephone companies don't (or didn't used to) like FBI agents running around seizing records all the time, they comply.
However this time the government isn't asking the telephone company to turn over records, it's asking the telephone company to build a new trunk line, free of charge.
And anyone who said they saw this coming was called a nut, tinfoil hat, paranoid or conspiracy theorist. Some people don't realize they're drowning until they actually feel the water burning inside their lungs.
the legal authority to compel Apple to provide them with the technical ability.
IANAL and even I can tell it doesn't work that way. Since when can the government grab a doctor and order him to perform an autopsy for a trial? Since when can the government grab a lab tech and order him to run lab tests? The government sources its OWN people for this - the coroner works for the state and the court, and as such has the last word - the state's word. While the government might not actually run labs itself it contracts them to work for it under a voluntary business arrangement, not using courts to bully them into it.
If the government does not have the technical ability, it's up to the government to hire - HIRE someone who does. Usually a third party. Not use a court order to try to "force" someone who does. Apple has done no wrong, Apple did not commit the crime, Apple has absolutely no responsibility for what happened. Why do they have to be "forced" into anything, let alone give up trade secrets and IP?
Oh I go through phases of posting, depending on my mood, on the news, on how busy I am with other stuff, etc. I have a similar amount of posts on this site as you, for better or for worse.
The signal to noise ratio on the internet in general is awful. I think this is the longest most intelligent exchange I've had certainly in years. The last time I think was when I met my second wife, and well, I ended up marrying her. Sorry I'm still married though - you'll just have to wait lol.
Yeah Panama seems ok. There is an undercurrent here because this place has grown far too quickly for its own good - skyscrapers amid the ghettos kind of thing. But all the nice apartments in luxury buildings are owned by foreigners. The native Panamanian (although his lot has improved marginally due to all the construction jobs and all the other service businesses that sprang up to support the foreigners) still lives modestly where he lived before. So now they're looking at all the buildings and the Luis Vuitton stores and other places where they can't afford to live, shop or eat, and wondering what's so special about foreigners that they "deserve" to go there... but I don't see any pitchforks just yet. And most of the animosity seems directed at the very large Venezuelan population who are all here fleeing Chavez/Maduro economics. Venezuelans are awesome but they are also latin and competitive and don't mind rubbing fellow latinos' faces in it when they succeed - and it's really not hard to beat the average Panamanian. Don't get me wrong I've known some very successful and smart Panamanians but overall - eugh. It's as if Panama is a place where ambition goes to die.
But yeah, my wife was asked by a cop to pay a 20 dollar bribe when she was caught making an illegal turn, and that's about it - we had no problem getting our permanent resident cards quickly and legally without bribes, for example. Panama is not so bad - apart from the traffic. And one hell of a lot warmer than San Jose, Costa Rica:)
Oh kids. I could talk for hours about my kids, their virtues and their failings. In the end you have to let them live their own lives and try not to ruin it for them either. I think you're doing the right thing. There's something to be said about merit. Best thing my parents ever did for me was force me to get a job at 15. I've been supporting myself most of my life, even though I've never really had to. I did the same for my kids - you want anything you need to get a job and do something with your life - ANYTHING. My youngest is jogging in place - she has other issues, but my eldest wow, her career has reached escape velocity. She's a professional at a Fortune 500 while studying for a second degree, she has plans to move to Europe after to get a Master's from a prestigious university and she'll get it too I have no doubt. She earns a very, very decent salary for 24. But the most impressive thing is she did it all herself, by herself. All I did was tell her to get a job, and support her when she needed a little help. I'm proud of her. And I love her sister to pieces but she has no ambition. She prefers to party, play with her phone, and cover her body in tattoos. Well it's her life and I don't judge her for it. But when she complains that her sister has so much more money than her I just have to say "well...."
Anyway feel free to drop me a line anytime it's been nice chatting. I'm on hotmail with this nick. Have been for years:)
Alright, so it's kind of a novella. 'Snot too long.
The TL;DR LEL millenial crowd can go fuck themselves. They're too busy playing with their phones anyway. Poor them, one day they'll finally look up and the world will have been sold from right under their feet. But I digress...
what the hell are they supposed to do with themselves after they've run out of laws to write?
I think society implodes or explodes under repression long before that point is reached. Then someone shoots all the politicians and burns all the books. Then someone shoots that guy (you should always fear the counter-revolution not the revolution itself). Then after a period of anarchy it all starts again. Nothing lasts forever, even though it may seem like forever at the time. Certainly it was forever for the people who died under the oppression.
Now, the idea is absurd - but is there anything *legal* preventing them from doing so?
Not really a valid objection because if you have the power to delete, modify, or create law, then it's just a matter of convincing your fellow lawmakers that this is a good idea. Corruption, greed, or just plain murder can help. Laws can always be changed - are always changed. They are never a stumbling block for the determined statesman. It's harder to do in a "democracy" because of the number of people involved, but it can be done. Look at the power the EU has granted itself, for example. Or the rise in authoritarianism overall in previously "free" countries around the world.
Nixon was forced to resign because evidence incriminating him and/or his staff might - MIGHT - have been caught on tape. Now a woman is running for President who has allegedly committed at least one crime by violating state secrets, and no one seems to bat an eyelid. I didn't mean to get political (I'm not American anyway so I don't vote there) but I'm trying to demonstrate how slippery the slope is. Soon we will have people openly confessing crimes running for office, no one will be able to say anything, and the government will not prosecute one of its elite "families". Legality is never an obstacle for getting power for very long.
And breaking someone financially is the ultimate power - possibly even worse than putting a bullet in his head. Because then you destroy him and all his dependents, but he's alive to perceive it. Better still, you could even have the power to deny him a chance to regain anything. Sorry - you've been excluded from the currency system...
One of the things discussed and acted on was diversification of assets (as well as tax avoidance - which is not evasion and is legal) and it's actually rather important to protect your assets against stuff like that.
You don't have to sell that to me. There's a reason I live in Panama, previously lived in Costa Rica, and in the Bahamas before that...:)
Yes it's a fine line between catching bad guys who need to be caught, and being a tyrant. The line is fine because after all, we are ALL guilty of something. As Cardinal Richelieu said: "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.". That was in a time when laws were much fewer and much simpler. I'm guessing we're probably down to one liners by now.
While paper currency has the usual problems, namely the guy with the plates for the printing press can print more, this is not just a problem with paper currency. Even if a bitcoin-like virtual currency were issued that mathematically could never exceed a certain quantity, government has the power to one day turn around and say "oh today this currency is invalid. We're using the new currency from now on and the exchange rate is 100 old to 1 new...". It's not paper per se that's to blame and people forget this. Government can always make a new law to fuck you over, and they have people with guns to enforce it.
But digital currency under the eyes of government - that's dangerous as hell. At least paper currency can be stashed somewhere. It can be placed overseas. It can be held by relatives. It can be put in a safety deposit box in your dog's name. But digital currency will let anyone with access at the government see exactly what you have, where you have it, and ostensibly hit the "nuke" button and have worldwide, immediate effects. Not to mention that there is always abuse. There's the jealous husband doing something to the guy that looked funny at his wife. There's the pervert looking up the assets of his favorite movie star. Etc. People get caught doing this regularly in the health profession and in the police with just health/criminal record information. Imagine if you had someone's world-wide assets, how they got it and how they spend it - at your fingertips. Did you know that so and so spends $500 a WEEK on doggie biscuits! The scandal!
And then of course there's the obvious argument - who is to say that this government owned closed source virtual currency can't be constantly and easily debauched. It is, after all, the game rulers have been playing since currency has existed.
That depends on the OS. We've moved on from the days when memory taken off and put back on the heap is fragmented and can't be assigned until it's the largest remaining chunk again.
The days of shortages of RAM are long gone. Unfortunately because it makes modern coders sloppy. But RAM is the least of your worries unless you're doing something crazy or have a huge memory leak problem.
It's the same logic. GP claims sarcastically that user laziness means Microsoft is being dishonest. But they are not mutually exclusive. Users are lazy AND Microsoft is also being dishonest. And claiming that Microsoft's dishonesty somehow justified by said laziness doesn't work either. Just because all the other kids at school are doing it doesn't mean you get to do it too.
I was joking about "virtual" currency. But if you want real world examples banks get "nationalized" all the time, even in "free" countries. You could look at what happened recently in Cyprus, for example, where due to government mismanagement everyone with a bank account in that country was given a "haircut". This idea of stealing people's money was so appealing that even Stephen Harper was considering doing it in Canada:
The Government proposes to implement a bail-in regime for systemically important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital. This will reduce risks for taxpayers. The Government will consult stakeholders on how best to implement a bail-in regime in Canada. Implementation timelines will allow for a smooth transition for affected institutions, investors and other market participants. "
I think Canada is arguably a "free country" still. And let's not forget all the times a bank is allowed to "freeze" your account, indefinitely, on judicial orders that can be as vague as "you're from a country our government is currently miffed at, fuck you". Virtual currency controlled by a central authority would be even easier to grab, since technically even if you don't have it stored "in the bank" they can just flag it as invalid and boom, your own electronic wallet is suddenly useless.
See the thing you have to remember about Robin Hood economics is that you can't steal from poor people because they don't have anything worth stealing. It makes for GREAT politics, because there are lots of poor people, they all have a vote, and they love it when the rich get fucked. But it makes for SHITTY economics because you're punishing the people who are cautious enough to manage their money wisely to reward the foolish who were reckless enough to squander their wealth.
Any halfway decent lawyer would call it Microsoft's nail in the coffin, because if ever these new "features" result in someone's machine being pwned DESPITE the user attempting to disable this "feature", Microsoft would be liable no matter what the EULA says. While IANAL I'm sure Microsoft can't hope to enforce a EULA that obliges you to accept to be extorted by ransomware, for example.
That's ok the wheel turns. And it keeps turning. The tighter the grip the closer the time comes. Orwell's vision of a boot stomping on a human face forever was flawed. We take turns, see.
So I'm sorry Mr. Smith, but according to the regulation in Chapter 48, paragraph 179 subsection j of volume 12 of last years' "Combined Banking and Virtual Currency Regulations", 3rd revision, we've been forced to suspend your account. No there's no appeal, this is not a judicial process. After all, it's only a virtual currency. Well then I suggest you read up on the regulations next time...
Slashdot Mirror
But you got a million tedious fight scenes that were never in the books.
Wait till the movie comes out on PPV. Spend $5. Done. There's a tax on your kids' impatience.
There's always the analog hole. People make cam versions in cinemas - won't be hard to make an even higher quality cam from a TV set.
This could easily be MUCH cheaper then going to the movie theater, especially if you add in drinks/snacks....
Eating Kraft macaroni and cheese at home is also much cheaper than going out to a high class restaurant. Your point? Watching a movie in the cinema is not the same as watching a movie at home, even though in both places you get a "movie". Just like horrible, boxed mac and cheese and a $60 angus steak are both "food". But if you can't see the difference then you deserve to pay more for less. If your family of four waits a few months the same movie will be on pay per view for $5, or on cable for the price of the subscription you're paying anyway.
I'm going to have a problem when Amazon finds out I don't have (nor want) a webcam.
If you want to buy something put a shoe on your head!
Well Angelina Jolie said that we should listen to Zuckerberg on this...
Seriously though, it's not just human but also animal nature to "worship" the successful. While that used to be the big alpha male who always won his fights, and through humanity turned into the chieftain or the king who also always won his fights (after all, God shall protect the right)... in today's world we no longer value fighting so much, so we worship the ones set on a pedestal before us ("famous" people) and the ones who make a lot of money. Is that right? No. But it's how human brains are wired.
especially by employees who "sacrificed that work/life balance to keep things going here,"
That's why you never, ever do that - especially not for a salary. Let some other sucker work there and ruin his life.
The government does not force telephone companies to turn over records. They ask them to. And the telephone company complies. Because if they don't, then the FBI sends goons around to seize the records. See - ultimately the FBI (ie the government) has to do the work. Since telephone companies don't (or didn't used to) like FBI agents running around seizing records all the time, they comply.
However this time the government isn't asking the telephone company to turn over records, it's asking the telephone company to build a new trunk line, free of charge.
Just don't look at the bit in the middle, but both ends are encrypted.
And anyone who said they saw this coming was called a nut, tinfoil hat, paranoid or conspiracy theorist. Some people don't realize they're drowning until they actually feel the water burning inside their lungs.
the legal authority to compel Apple to provide them with the technical ability.
IANAL and even I can tell it doesn't work that way. Since when can the government grab a doctor and order him to perform an autopsy for a trial? Since when can the government grab a lab tech and order him to run lab tests? The government sources its OWN people for this - the coroner works for the state and the court, and as such has the last word - the state's word. While the government might not actually run labs itself it contracts them to work for it under a voluntary business arrangement, not using courts to bully them into it.
If the government does not have the technical ability, it's up to the government to hire - HIRE someone who does. Usually a third party. Not use a court order to try to "force" someone who does. Apple has done no wrong, Apple did not commit the crime, Apple has absolutely no responsibility for what happened. Why do they have to be "forced" into anything, let alone give up trade secrets and IP?
Oh I go through phases of posting, depending on my mood, on the news, on how busy I am with other stuff, etc. I have a similar amount of posts on this site as you, for better or for worse.
The signal to noise ratio on the internet in general is awful. I think this is the longest most intelligent exchange I've had certainly in years. The last time I think was when I met my second wife, and well, I ended up marrying her. Sorry I'm still married though - you'll just have to wait lol.
Yeah Panama seems ok. There is an undercurrent here because this place has grown far too quickly for its own good - skyscrapers amid the ghettos kind of thing. But all the nice apartments in luxury buildings are owned by foreigners. The native Panamanian (although his lot has improved marginally due to all the construction jobs and all the other service businesses that sprang up to support the foreigners) still lives modestly where he lived before. So now they're looking at all the buildings and the Luis Vuitton stores and other places where they can't afford to live, shop or eat, and wondering what's so special about foreigners that they "deserve" to go there... but I don't see any pitchforks just yet. And most of the animosity seems directed at the very large Venezuelan population who are all here fleeing Chavez/Maduro economics. Venezuelans are awesome but they are also latin and competitive and don't mind rubbing fellow latinos' faces in it when they succeed - and it's really not hard to beat the average Panamanian. Don't get me wrong I've known some very successful and smart Panamanians but overall - eugh. It's as if Panama is a place where ambition goes to die.
But yeah, my wife was asked by a cop to pay a 20 dollar bribe when she was caught making an illegal turn, and that's about it - we had no problem getting our permanent resident cards quickly and legally without bribes, for example. Panama is not so bad - apart from the traffic. And one hell of a lot warmer than San Jose, Costa Rica :)
Oh kids. I could talk for hours about my kids, their virtues and their failings. In the end you have to let them live their own lives and try not to ruin it for them either. I think you're doing the right thing. There's something to be said about merit. Best thing my parents ever did for me was force me to get a job at 15. I've been supporting myself most of my life, even though I've never really had to. I did the same for my kids - you want anything you need to get a job and do something with your life - ANYTHING. My youngest is jogging in place - she has other issues, but my eldest wow, her career has reached escape velocity. She's a professional at a Fortune 500 while studying for a second degree, she has plans to move to Europe after to get a Master's from a prestigious university and she'll get it too I have no doubt. She earns a very, very decent salary for 24. But the most impressive thing is she did it all herself, by herself. All I did was tell her to get a job, and support her when she needed a little help. I'm proud of her. And I love her sister to pieces but she has no ambition. She prefers to party, play with her phone, and cover her body in tattoos. Well it's her life and I don't judge her for it. But when she complains that her sister has so much more money than her I just have to say "well...."
Anyway feel free to drop me a line anytime it's been nice chatting. I'm on hotmail with this nick. Have been for years :)
Alright, so it's kind of a novella. 'Snot too long.
The TL;DR LEL millenial crowd can go fuck themselves. They're too busy playing with their phones anyway. Poor them, one day they'll finally look up and the world will have been sold from right under their feet. But I digress...
what the hell are they supposed to do with themselves after they've run out of laws to write?
I think society implodes or explodes under repression long before that point is reached. Then someone shoots all the politicians and burns all the books. Then someone shoots that guy (you should always fear the counter-revolution not the revolution itself). Then after a period of anarchy it all starts again. Nothing lasts forever, even though it may seem like forever at the time. Certainly it was forever for the people who died under the oppression.
Now, the idea is absurd - but is there anything *legal* preventing them from doing so?
Not really a valid objection because if you have the power to delete, modify, or create law, then it's just a matter of convincing your fellow lawmakers that this is a good idea. Corruption, greed, or just plain murder can help. Laws can always be changed - are always changed. They are never a stumbling block for the determined statesman. It's harder to do in a "democracy" because of the number of people involved, but it can be done. Look at the power the EU has granted itself, for example. Or the rise in authoritarianism overall in previously "free" countries around the world.
Nixon was forced to resign because evidence incriminating him and/or his staff might - MIGHT - have been caught on tape. Now a woman is running for President who has allegedly committed at least one crime by violating state secrets, and no one seems to bat an eyelid. I didn't mean to get political (I'm not American anyway so I don't vote there) but I'm trying to demonstrate how slippery the slope is. Soon we will have people openly confessing crimes running for office, no one will be able to say anything, and the government will not prosecute one of its elite "families". Legality is never an obstacle for getting power for very long.
And breaking someone financially is the ultimate power - possibly even worse than putting a bullet in his head. Because then you destroy him and all his dependents, but he's alive to perceive it. Better still, you could even have the power to deny him a chance to regain anything. Sorry - you've been excluded from the currency system...
One of the things discussed and acted on was diversification of assets (as well as tax avoidance - which is not evasion and is legal) and it's actually rather important to protect your assets against stuff like that.
You don't have to sell that to me. There's a reason I live in Panama, previously lived in Costa Rica, and in the Bahamas before that... :)
Yes it's a fine line between catching bad guys who need to be caught, and being a tyrant. The line is fine because after all, we are ALL guilty of something. As Cardinal Richelieu said: "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.". That was in a time when laws were much fewer and much simpler. I'm guessing we're probably down to one liners by now.
While paper currency has the usual problems, namely the guy with the plates for the printing press can print more, this is not just a problem with paper currency. Even if a bitcoin-like virtual currency were issued that mathematically could never exceed a certain quantity, government has the power to one day turn around and say "oh today this currency is invalid. We're using the new currency from now on and the exchange rate is 100 old to 1 new...". It's not paper per se that's to blame and people forget this. Government can always make a new law to fuck you over, and they have people with guns to enforce it.
But digital currency under the eyes of government - that's dangerous as hell. At least paper currency can be stashed somewhere. It can be placed overseas. It can be held by relatives. It can be put in a safety deposit box in your dog's name. But digital currency will let anyone with access at the government see exactly what you have, where you have it, and ostensibly hit the "nuke" button and have worldwide, immediate effects. Not to mention that there is always abuse. There's the jealous husband doing something to the guy that looked funny at his wife. There's the pervert looking up the assets of his favorite movie star. Etc. People get caught doing this regularly in the health profession and in the police with just health/criminal record information. Imagine if you had someone's world-wide assets, how they got it and how they spend it - at your fingertips. Did you know that so and so spends $500 a WEEK on doggie biscuits! The scandal!
And then of course there's the obvious argument - who is to say that this government owned closed source virtual currency can't be constantly and easily debauched. It is, after all, the game rulers have been playing since currency has existed.
Well it might be good at Go, but I wonder if it can play this game. Or a good game of chess?
That depends on the OS. We've moved on from the days when memory taken off and put back on the heap is fragmented and can't be assigned until it's the largest remaining chunk again.
The days of shortages of RAM are long gone. Unfortunately because it makes modern coders sloppy. But RAM is the least of your worries unless you're doing something crazy or have a huge memory leak problem.
I'm not making it up. They do invalidate your key. What I didn't know was that if you begged them on the phone they would give it back.
It's the same logic. GP claims sarcastically that user laziness means Microsoft is being dishonest. But they are not mutually exclusive. Users are lazy AND Microsoft is also being dishonest. And claiming that Microsoft's dishonesty somehow justified by said laziness doesn't work either. Just because all the other kids at school are doing it doesn't mean you get to do it too.
It happens at my age.
I was joking about "virtual" currency. But if you want real world examples banks get "nationalized" all the time, even in "free" countries. You could look at what happened recently in Cyprus, for example, where due to government mismanagement everyone with a bank account in that country was given a "haircut". This idea of stealing people's money was so appealing that even Stephen Harper was considering doing it in Canada:
The Government proposes to implement a bail-in regime for systemically important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital. This will reduce risks for taxpayers. The Government will consult stakeholders on how best to implement a bail-in regime in Canada. Implementation timelines will allow for a smooth transition for affected institutions, investors and other market participants. "
Taken from the 2013 Economic Action Plan, pp 144-5
I think Canada is arguably a "free country" still. And let's not forget all the times a bank is allowed to "freeze" your account, indefinitely, on judicial orders that can be as vague as "you're from a country our government is currently miffed at, fuck you". Virtual currency controlled by a central authority would be even easier to grab, since technically even if you don't have it stored "in the bank" they can just flag it as invalid and boom, your own electronic wallet is suddenly useless.
See the thing you have to remember about Robin Hood economics is that you can't steal from poor people because they don't have anything worth stealing. It makes for GREAT politics, because there are lots of poor people, they all have a vote, and they love it when the rich get fucked. But it makes for SHITTY economics because you're punishing the people who are cautious enough to manage their money wisely to reward the foolish who were reckless enough to squander their wealth.
Any halfway decent lawyer would call it Microsoft's nail in the coffin, because if ever these new "features" result in someone's machine being pwned DESPITE the user attempting to disable this "feature", Microsoft would be liable no matter what the EULA says. While IANAL I'm sure Microsoft can't hope to enforce a EULA that obliges you to accept to be extorted by ransomware, for example.
That's ok the wheel turns. And it keeps turning. The tighter the grip the closer the time comes. Orwell's vision of a boot stomping on a human face forever was flawed. We take turns, see.
So I'm sorry Mr. Smith, but according to the regulation in Chapter 48, paragraph 179 subsection j of volume 12 of last years' "Combined Banking and Virtual Currency Regulations", 3rd revision, we've been forced to suspend your account. No there's no appeal, this is not a judicial process. After all, it's only a virtual currency. Well then I suggest you read up on the regulations next time...