You're right, but the feeling I get is you are using this as a cop-out. Plenty of methods are tried and true. If you try those methods and your kid is still a piece of shit, then yeah maybe we don't get to call you a shitty parent.
If you're one of those cunts who's going to use all new fangled bullshit that flies in the face of the standard practices (that we know work most of the time) and your kid turns out to be a murderer, then we do get to lay some of the blame at your feet.
We are literally only four or five generations away from parents forcing their kids to work as soon as they could walk.\
Listen here, asshole. When you use the word literally you don't then get to use exaggerations. Kids start walking at about 2 years old (give or take a bit).. In 1900 nobody was making 2 year old children work.
The term literally exists for the sole purpose of defining a statement as NOT EXAGGERATED. Fucking hell.......
Fast lanes were never about prioritizing TYPES of traffic for performance reasons, you shill. That shit has been legal FOREVER. Exemptions were always (even under the net neutrality days) given for performance and congestion situations.
Net Neutrality is about prohibiting ISPs from getting to shape traffic for purely FINANCIAL reasons.
This is not what net neutrality is about and you know it.
Net neutrality is about me paying my ISP for 20 mbits/second and then not being able to download from XYZ streaming company (whom I have also paid) at full speed unless XYZ sends a check to my ISP to be marked as a PRIORITY DESTINATION.
XYZ pays their ISP (FastCo) and I pay my ISP (ZoomCo) and that should be the end of it.. The Anti-Neutrality people want me to pay ZoomCo and then XYZ to pay both FastCo and ZoomCo.. That's bullshit.
Listen folks, you can't get innovation without letting people organize themselves and their resources however they see fit.
I would totally agree with you 100% if it wasn't for the fact that in huge chunks of the US, there is exactly one hard line service provider of internet.. Typically this is the local cable company. It's illegal to compete with them on equal terms (no access to right-of-way or telephone poles) and often they receive government subsidies. When the government is handing your competitor cash how the fuck do you compete with that?
I'll be fine with ditching Net Neutrality if we also ditch the corporate cronyism. Until such time as we have a situation where competition is not legally prohibited, then said companies can't bitch about the rules / laws placed upon them. Take government money and you don't get to bitch about the government rules.
.... has to deal with the historical fact that Obama's bailout of GM, like TARP, made risk public and.....
One small point.. GM was not, in fact, "bailed out". The old General Motors Corporation ceased to exist. The current GM, of today, is actually an entirely new corporation.
It is an entirely different entity with the same name as the previous company. Federal money (lots of it) was spent to finance the process of bankruptcy, but the old GM stock was effectively rendered worthless. People holding old GM stock ended up with pennies on the dollar at best and nothing at worst. Most creditors also received pennies on the dollar.
If it were really possible to increase the efficiency this much without any downsides, nature probably would have already stumbled upon it after all these billions of years. After all, a plant that can grow 40% bigger and faster than its predecessors would totally out compete and annihilate other plants vying for the same resources.
Right... Prior to humans, wheat had really tiny seeds (in comparison to what we have today). We selectively bred wheat to have large kernels (more output per acre that way).. You see anyone dying from the runaway wheat?
Is there anything that doesn't scare the shit out of you fucking luddites?
Let's see... Former plants used to create anti-oxidants to detoxify themselves from the harmful affects of O2. Then somebody modifies the plants so they don't waste energy detoxifying itself... Yeah, I see no problems with making this modification to the world's food supplies whatsoever. So what if the resulting plants are a bit more toxic than you used to have? It grows 40% faster and bigger, so we can expect increased profits biggly. This is gonna to be HUGE!
Yeah, because you have any idea of what's going on. If you read the fucking summary it said that the plants have to detoxify themselves AFTER using an oxygen molecule instead of a carbon dioxide molecule (apparently the plants aren't selective enough).. They modified the plant so it WILL NOT use oxygen and will, instead, use ONLY carbon dioxide.. This negates the need to detoxify itself. No oxygen use = no need for detoxification.
The criticism of companies like Google or Apple is that their actions are immoral, rather than illegal.
By whom? Leftists? How is it immoral to only pay the taxes you are required to pay? Nobody, statistically, pays more taxes than they owe. Not people and not corporations... So where's the immorality? How would they become moral? Guessing at a fair amount and paying that? Only taking some deductions? Which ones? Is it immoral for a regular person to be careful when calculating the tax they owe and only paying that? If your neighbor simply fills out the 1040-EZ and doesn't bother with any deductions at all is he a better person?
Once you get past the laws on theft / rape / murder / fraud / etc, you'll find that morality and legality rarely intersect.
Nice to see someone actually suggest an actual well thought out solution to try (even if you don't think it will work) versus the rest of the idiots who just scream about fraud and injustice while paying only the taxes they owe and not a dime more..
And this "I don't like it do something about it and FUCK what the law says I want them punished!" mentality is just enabling shit behavior from governments.
Precisely... Always amazing how these morons think that companies made up of humans are evil but governments made up of humans are good...
This.. "well it's not technically against the letter of the law.. so it's okay.." mentality is just enabling shit behavior from corporations.
And how the fuck do you propose to fix that? You want laws where a person/company can follow them to the letter and still be charged with a crime? Thousands of years of civilization and I'm not aware of any country that had laws that could be broken by following them..
When you finish your taxes, at the end of the year, do you tack on an extra zero? Why not? I mean, according to you, it's avoidance to not pay more than you are legally required.. Somehow I suspect you send a check in for what you owe and not for more... Most people I know are very careful at tax time to account for all legal deductions and credits so that when they sign their name on the check they are paying exactly what they legally owe and not a dime more. Quit acting like it's moral when you do it and somehow immoral when Google does it.
Sorry, I'm with gp. I don't believe in giving-up just because it's difficult to close the loopholes.
Close? Rarely are loopholes an oversight.. The bulk of the tax code, in the United States, are loopholes that are specifically written to favor a particular industry or company.
Case in point: Did you know that there are entire industries exempted from overtime laws? How do you think those exemptions got there? They weren't written into the bill when it was originally passed...
If you think that the government is going to close those loopholes in the face of the army of lobbyists and campaign donors, you aren't all that bright....
How about we reserve the term Nazi for the folks who actually killed 7+ million people? We already have a good term for Google; "Assholes". But, they aren't operating any ovens/gas chambers so maybe Nazi isn't the best term.. Killing millions of people and spying on people's internet habits are two vastly different things.
I state the fact that we have immigration to make up for our birth deficiency and you take that as me having a problem with people of color? What the fuck is wrong with you? I said we're importing 1M people/year.. That's a fact. If you can point to the sentence where I said something negative about that, I'd love to see it.
As for where, the State Department, mouth breather.
.... government shutdown means the Legislature cannot be convened.
No it doesn't. The fact that the media calls this a government shutdown does not make it one. Only non essential services have been shutdown. The VAST bulk of the Federal Government is still in full operation. If you turn off 25% of the lights in a room, is it dark? No.. And neither has the government shutdown when 75% of it is still running.
Even if Mexico *were* to pay for it, the Trump Administration would need authorization from Congress because that's how the Constitution works.
What the fuck are you blathering about? If Mexico pays for it, Trump does not need Congressional approval.. He's not spending US money. Do you need congressional approval to spend your paycheck? No? Yeah, I'm pretty sure Mexico doesn't need US Congressional approval to spend their own money.
Trump would need approval to spend taxpayer funds..Mexico could spend their money however the fuck they wanted to. If they said "this is for a wall" then Trump could spend it on a wall. It's not a gift to the general fund and it's not taxpayer funds..
Most illegal immigration occurs via ports of call or other sources than the southern border.
Once again, you shortsighted asshole, just because a point of entry isn't the LARGEST entry point doesn't mean you don't benefit by securing it.
If 3 robbers will come in through the door and two will come in through the window, locking the window still reduces the number of robbers who will get in the house.. See how that works?
Slashdot Mirror
There is no simple correct way of doing things.
You're right, but the feeling I get is you are using this as a cop-out. Plenty of methods are tried and true. If you try those methods and your kid is still a piece of shit, then yeah maybe we don't get to call you a shitty parent.
If you're one of those cunts who's going to use all new fangled bullshit that flies in the face of the standard practices (that we know work most of the time) and your kid turns out to be a murderer, then we do get to lay some of the blame at your feet.
We are literally only four or five generations away from parents forcing their kids to work as soon as they could walk.\
Listen here, asshole. When you use the word literally you don't then get to use exaggerations. Kids start walking at about 2 years old (give or take a bit).. In 1900 nobody was making 2 year old children work.
The term literally exists for the sole purpose of defining a statement as NOT EXAGGERATED. Fucking hell.......
Fast lanes were never about prioritizing TYPES of traffic for performance reasons, you shill. That shit has been legal FOREVER. Exemptions were always (even under the net neutrality days) given for performance and congestion situations.
Net Neutrality is about prohibiting ISPs from getting to shape traffic for purely FINANCIAL reasons.
This is not what net neutrality is about and you know it.
Net neutrality is about me paying my ISP for 20 mbits/second and then not being able to download from XYZ streaming company (whom I have also paid) at full speed unless XYZ sends a check to my ISP to be marked as a PRIORITY DESTINATION.
XYZ pays their ISP (FastCo) and I pay my ISP (ZoomCo) and that should be the end of it.. The Anti-Neutrality people want me to pay ZoomCo and then XYZ to pay both FastCo and ZoomCo.. That's bullshit.
Listen folks, you can't get innovation without letting people organize themselves and their resources however they see fit.
I would totally agree with you 100% if it wasn't for the fact that in huge chunks of the US, there is exactly one hard line service provider of internet.. Typically this is the local cable company. It's illegal to compete with them on equal terms (no access to right-of-way or telephone poles) and often they receive government subsidies. When the government is handing your competitor cash how the fuck do you compete with that?
I'll be fine with ditching Net Neutrality if we also ditch the corporate cronyism. Until such time as we have a situation where competition is not legally prohibited, then said companies can't bitch about the rules / laws placed upon them. Take government money and you don't get to bitch about the government rules.
Agreed. I just wanted to point out that the old GM no longer exists. Its collapse was a huge financial hit for a lot of people.
.... has to deal with the historical fact that Obama's bailout of GM, like TARP, made risk public and .....
One small point.. GM was not, in fact, "bailed out". The old General Motors Corporation ceased to exist. The current GM, of today, is actually an entirely new corporation.
It is an entirely different entity with the same name as the previous company. Federal money (lots of it) was spent to finance the process of bankruptcy, but the old GM stock was effectively rendered worthless. People holding old GM stock ended up with pennies on the dollar at best and nothing at worst. Most creditors also received pennies on the dollar.
If it were really possible to increase the efficiency this much without any downsides, nature probably would have already stumbled upon it after all these billions of years. After all, a plant that can grow 40% bigger and faster than its predecessors would totally out compete and annihilate other plants vying for the same resources.
Right... Prior to humans, wheat had really tiny seeds (in comparison to what we have today). We selectively bred wheat to have large kernels (more output per acre that way).. You see anyone dying from the runaway wheat? Is there anything that doesn't scare the shit out of you fucking luddites?
Let's see... Former plants used to create anti-oxidants to detoxify themselves from the harmful affects of O2. Then somebody modifies the plants so they don't waste energy detoxifying itself... Yeah, I see no problems with making this modification to the world's food supplies whatsoever. So what if the resulting plants are a bit more toxic than you used to have? It grows 40% faster and bigger, so we can expect increased profits biggly. This is gonna to be HUGE!
Yeah, because you have any idea of what's going on. If you read the fucking summary it said that the plants have to detoxify themselves AFTER using an oxygen molecule instead of a carbon dioxide molecule (apparently the plants aren't selective enough).. They modified the plant so it WILL NOT use oxygen and will, instead, use ONLY carbon dioxide.. This negates the need to detoxify itself. No oxygen use = no need for detoxification.
Do I need to draw it in crayon?
Touche
Doesn't matter what platform you're using, the only way to keep Facebook out of your life is to stay away from Facebook.
And you're wrong... Very wrong. Do a google search on Facebook Shadow Profiles... You're probably in Facebook even if you've never used them before.
The criticism of companies like Google or Apple is that their actions are immoral, rather than illegal.
By whom? Leftists? How is it immoral to only pay the taxes you are required to pay? Nobody, statistically, pays more taxes than they owe. Not people and not corporations... So where's the immorality? How would they become moral? Guessing at a fair amount and paying that? Only taking some deductions? Which ones? Is it immoral for a regular person to be careful when calculating the tax they owe and only paying that? If your neighbor simply fills out the 1040-EZ and doesn't bother with any deductions at all is he a better person?
Once you get past the laws on theft / rape / murder / fraud / etc, you'll find that morality and legality rarely intersect.
Nice to see someone actually suggest an actual well thought out solution to try (even if you don't think it will work) versus the rest of the idiots who just scream about fraud and injustice while paying only the taxes they owe and not a dime more..
And this "I don't like it do something about it and FUCK what the law says I want them punished!" mentality is just enabling shit behavior from governments.
Precisely... Always amazing how these morons think that companies made up of humans are evil but governments made up of humans are good...
This.. "well it's not technically against the letter of the law.. so it's okay.." mentality is just enabling shit behavior from corporations.
And how the fuck do you propose to fix that? You want laws where a person/company can follow them to the letter and still be charged with a crime? Thousands of years of civilization and I'm not aware of any country that had laws that could be broken by following them..
It's not fraud/evasion/avoidance when it's legal.
When you finish your taxes, at the end of the year, do you tack on an extra zero? Why not? I mean, according to you, it's avoidance to not pay more than you are legally required.. Somehow I suspect you send a check in for what you owe and not for more... Most people I know are very careful at tax time to account for all legal deductions and credits so that when they sign their name on the check they are paying exactly what they legally owe and not a dime more. Quit acting like it's moral when you do it and somehow immoral when Google does it.
Sorry, I'm with gp. I don't believe in giving-up just because it's difficult to close the loopholes.
Close? Rarely are loopholes an oversight.. The bulk of the tax code, in the United States, are loopholes that are specifically written to favor a particular industry or company.
Case in point: Did you know that there are entire industries exempted from overtime laws? How do you think those exemptions got there? They weren't written into the bill when it was originally passed...
If you think that the government is going to close those loopholes in the face of the army of lobbyists and campaign donors, you aren't all that bright....
How about we reserve the term Nazi for the folks who actually killed 7+ million people? We already have a good term for Google; "Assholes". But, they aren't operating any ovens/gas chambers so maybe Nazi isn't the best term.. Killing millions of people and spying on people's internet habits are two vastly different things.
I will miss them greatly!!!
They considered shutting down. But they did not.. So you're kinda jumping the gun there...
Your name doesn't appear on Slashdot. Are you not understanding how the AC system works?
And by all means pay the Apple tax everyone else has for a good reason.
Is that the one where you pay Apple to not spy on you but, instead, launch the Facebook app so Zuckerberg can spy on you?
I state the fact that we have immigration to make up for our birth deficiency and you take that as me having a problem with people of color? What the fuck is wrong with you? I said we're importing 1M people/year.. That's a fact. If you can point to the sentence where I said something negative about that, I'd love to see it.
As for where, the State Department, mouth breather.
.... government shutdown means the Legislature cannot be convened.
No it doesn't. The fact that the media calls this a government shutdown does not make it one. Only non essential services have been shutdown. The VAST bulk of the Federal Government is still in full operation. If you turn off 25% of the lights in a room, is it dark? No.. And neither has the government shutdown when 75% of it is still running.
Even if Mexico *were* to pay for it, the Trump Administration would need authorization from Congress because that's how the Constitution works.
What the fuck are you blathering about? If Mexico pays for it, Trump does not need Congressional approval.. He's not spending US money. Do you need congressional approval to spend your paycheck? No? Yeah, I'm pretty sure Mexico doesn't need US Congressional approval to spend their own money.
Trump would need approval to spend taxpayer funds..Mexico could spend their money however the fuck they wanted to. If they said "this is for a wall" then Trump could spend it on a wall. It's not a gift to the general fund and it's not taxpayer funds..
Most illegal immigration occurs via ports of call or other sources than the southern border.
Once again, you shortsighted asshole, just because a point of entry isn't the LARGEST entry point doesn't mean you don't benefit by securing it.
If 3 robbers will come in through the door and two will come in through the window, locking the window still reduces the number of robbers who will get in the house.. See how that works?