Re:It's 2004, North American Needs To Move On.
on
Is IP Property?
·
· Score: 1
Well, you could do like Walter Russell Meade, and think of all Americans in terms of Hamiltonians, Wilsonians, Jeffersonians, and Jacksonians. Unfortunately, this only covers foreign policy, not domestic; I'd love to see similar treatment in the domestic policy realm.
I don't buy it either, for a different reason: I don't think shipping people into space could overcome the growth rate. Right now there's over 25000 new people on the earth every day, even accounting for deaths. You might get that many people moving with multiple space elevators, but with current techniques, I don't think we could produce fuel, vehicles, platforms, and launches fast enough.
No kidding. One time I was changing lanes when the lady in destination lane pulled up to my rear and flashed her headlights at me. I was so distracted by her "expression" that I almost dropped my cellphone.
Unfortunately, said macaque was in fact seen more easily by the brain-damaged bipedal puma in the exhibit next door, and subsequently caught and eaten. Evolution is a harsh mistress.
The same effort you could put into politics, you could also put into becoming a creator of value for society.
Ahh, but for a lesser amount of effort, you can mooch off a creator or two, and come out ahead. The game is not stable; if everyone's a creator, your best short-term move is to mooch. But then everyone becomes a mooch, which means nothing gets created, only consumed.
I think you overgeneralize when you say all racists spread hate. Some racists are perfectly happy to mind their own racist business, thank you very much...
Or you could look at it this way: sub-orbital flight can potentially yield returns far beyond the investment. And I don't mean just the ability to fly at sub-orbital altitudes; getting this far proves you've got the brains and cojones to achieve this feat, which attracts other investors, which can fund bigger projects.
But if you can't bear the investment, the X-Prize may soften that blow to the point that a company may give it a try. Think of it as a carrot that will feed you long enough to get to the BIG carrot farther on.
Capitalism isn't about trying to control a market. It's about selling something so good that people will buy it.
Trying to control a market stems from the idea that one should play the capitalism game just long enough to get to the point where one doesn't have to play by capitalism's rules anymore. It's not supposed to work that way. Your reward is not getting to lock out competitors, fix prices, and coast; your reward is enough money to keep playing. You can opt to keep selling your stuff as is, if it sells well, or make it better or different, if it's not; but you don't keep working, you can't expect to keep eating your cake.
Holy crap, you're right. Particularly for the older stuff. As cool as it would be to buy a copy of VisiCalc 1.0, it'd be really, really nice to get some vintage 60s band soundtrack, or some obscure movie, without having to go to a specialty store.
Nice to know that I can listen to Click and Clack on my computer without being constantly bombarded with pop-ups from a piece of annoyware.
You think that was bad? I used to listen to them on the radio in the car. You know how hard it is to close a popup on your windshield while keeping your hands at 2 and 10? It's damned hard, I tell you.
Hmm. Yes, it does seem to have an effect, but in my case, it was a negative one. It had the effect of putting me on alert, as per the review.
One alerting factor was singling me out as "friend"; if you had addressed "friends", I would've felt like I was slipping under the radar, like I could visit the site without being noticed, which appeals to my introverted side. Second, the use of "friend" in other contexts, namely spam, gives it a very negative connotation. Thirdly, of course, you alerted me with "See? It works!".
Finally, the usual caveats. I realize that this was a very subjective observation on my part, and hence of dubious scientific value. Secondly, your intended humor is noted and appreciated. Indeed, I would not be doing my part as a/. reader if I hadn't replied with this pedantic comment.
(In fact, having said all this, I now feel motivated to visit your site by way of feeling obligated - also as per the review. Interesting.)
It's too bad. I read the headline and immediately thought of a comment I posted last November.
Seems this is nowhere near the same thing. I proposed insuring people against the cost of fixing a bug in open software. This, OTOH, is simply litigation risk management. Feh. Well, still a fairly good idea, I suppose. It just doesn't strike me as being terribly constructive.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you could do like Walter Russell Meade, and think of all Americans in terms of Hamiltonians, Wilsonians, Jeffersonians, and Jacksonians. Unfortunately, this only covers foreign policy, not domestic; I'd love to see similar treatment in the domestic policy realm.
By your reasoning, it's obvious: black iMacs suck the most, because they're opaque, and opaque == obscure. Clear iMacs rule.
Looks like you gave yourself away there. Now we know Anonymous Coward is really Mateito (746185).
Reminds me of the one about the politician who could never get elected until he changed his name to "None of the Above".
I don't buy it either, for a different reason: I don't think shipping people into space could overcome the growth rate. Right now there's over 25000 new people on the earth every day, even accounting for deaths. You might get that many people moving with multiple space elevators, but with current techniques, I don't think we could produce fuel, vehicles, platforms, and launches fast enough.
No kidding. One time I was changing lanes when the lady in destination lane pulled up to my rear and flashed her headlights at me. I was so distracted by her "expression" that I almost dropped my cellphone.
Unfortunately, said macaque was in fact seen more easily by the brain-damaged bipedal puma in the exhibit next door, and subsequently caught and eaten. Evolution is a harsh mistress.
The same effort you could put into politics, you could also put into becoming a creator of value for society.
Ahh, but for a lesser amount of effort, you can mooch off a creator or two, and come out ahead. The game is not stable; if everyone's a creator, your best short-term move is to mooch. But then everyone becomes a mooch, which means nothing gets created, only consumed.
I think you overgeneralize when you say all racists spread hate. Some racists are perfectly happy to mind their own racist business, thank you very much...
Will you now censor me?
No. But I will mod you down. Mua-ha-ha-ha-haaaaa!
Except that I just commented in this thread. Curses. Foiled again.
That's your answer to everything, isn't it...
Don't worry. If these can, they'll immediately detect it, so we're safe.
What does an integer compare instruction have to do with anything??
Pretty much bragging rights, yes.
Or you could look at it this way: sub-orbital flight can potentially yield returns far beyond the investment. And I don't mean just the ability to fly at sub-orbital altitudes; getting this far proves you've got the brains and cojones to achieve this feat, which attracts other investors, which can fund bigger projects.
But if you can't bear the investment, the X-Prize may soften that blow to the point that a company may give it a try. Think of it as a carrot that will feed you long enough to get to the BIG carrot farther on.
Capitalism isn't about trying to control a market. It's about selling something so good that people will buy it.
Trying to control a market stems from the idea that one should play the capitalism game just long enough to get to the point where one doesn't have to play by capitalism's rules anymore. It's not supposed to work that way. Your reward is not getting to lock out competitors, fix prices, and coast; your reward is enough money to keep playing. You can opt to keep selling your stuff as is, if it sells well, or make it better or different, if it's not; but you don't keep working, you can't expect to keep eating your cake.
I'm not sure I want to play on something whose name looks like "cocks box".
Just so long as you're okay with being the only one camped out there for the next 407 days.
Holy crap, you're right. Particularly for the older stuff. As cool as it would be to buy a copy of VisiCalc 1.0, it'd be really, really nice to get some vintage 60s band soundtrack, or some obscure movie, without having to go to a specialty store.
One typically refers to it, however, as something else. Which I shall not repeat here.
Nice to know that I can listen to Click and Clack on my computer without being constantly bombarded with pop-ups from a piece of annoyware.
You think that was bad? I used to listen to them on the radio in the car. You know how hard it is to close a popup on your windshield while keeping your hands at 2 and 10? It's damned hard, I tell you.
Hmm. Yes, it does seem to have an effect, but in my case, it was a negative one. It had the effect of putting me on alert, as per the review.
/. reader if I hadn't replied with this pedantic comment.
One alerting factor was singling me out as "friend"; if you had addressed "friends", I would've felt like I was slipping under the radar, like I could visit the site without being noticed, which appeals to my introverted side. Second, the use of "friend" in other contexts, namely spam, gives it a very negative connotation. Thirdly, of course, you alerted me with "See? It works!".
Finally, the usual caveats. I realize that this was a very subjective observation on my part, and hence of dubious scientific value. Secondly, your intended humor is noted and appreciated. Indeed, I would not be doing my part as a
(In fact, having said all this, I now feel motivated to visit your site by way of feeling obligated - also as per the review. Interesting.)
I hadn't realized Jack Handey had a Slashdot handle...
It's too bad. I read the headline and immediately thought of a comment I posted last November.
Seems this is nowhere near the same thing. I proposed insuring people against the cost of fixing a bug in open software. This, OTOH, is simply litigation risk management. Feh. Well, still a fairly good idea, I suppose. It just doesn't strike me as being terribly constructive.
I'd like to know how they finally noticed what was going on, too. None of the articles I could find mentioned this.
The link I had to Street Smarts finally loaded after I'd already posted. Seems they do film around the country.