Since they're talking about Silicon Valley, I'm assuming that they mean libertarianism as Ayn Rand's version of it, objectivism. Objectivism is for people who read & follow Ayn Rand & haven't yet worked out that it's just an elaborate way of saying anti-social asshole.
...introduced govt. support for unionisation as a way to save capitalism from itself. Without some form of constraint from the govt. or the workers or both, corporations were set to start a Bolshevik revolution. In other words, unions are what keep the Bolsheviks at bay.
It seems that every new generation of capitalists have to learn this the hard way: In the longer term, unions are the least bad option they have.
Amazon already sells a way to prevent radio tracking from devices hidden inside delivery boxes: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=myl... Thieves can bring the boxes back to a room that is also RF shielded, remove the RF tracking devices, deactivate them, & sell them on Amazon & Ebay.
I think a better solution is for Amazon & its customers to stop creating tempting opportunities for theft out in the world we all have to live in. I don't want Amazon to encourage thieves to patrol my neighbourhood looking for opportunities. It's just a really bad idea.
So Yang is launching a TV ad campaign, only, if you want to see it, you have to leave your home & go to a specific place at a specific time to watch it... & Yang might even be watching you watching the ad & then answer some questions on Skype/Facetime.
This is precisely what just about every big IP company, from Disney to Getty & more, do. They're literally stealing control of content from others, including private individuals', CC, & public domain works. Don't like it? Tough: They'll bankrupt you in court regardless of whether their claim of copyright infringement is legitimate or not. It's quicker, cheaper, & less problematic to just pay them for it, and they know it. I'm not against copyright - creatives should get paid - but this isn't what's happening. How copyright law is implemented & enforced needs some major adjustments to level the playing field to make everyone equal under the eyes of the law, regardless of their ability to pay for hoards of corporate lawyers & law firms.
The USA in particular & all countries in general have banned a lot of things. All countries have central planning - That's what makes them countries. The market's not very good at deciding what's right & wrong.
So yet another story confirms that a VC capital funded IT startup has no credibility. Buyer beware. Use at your own risk. Don't expect any kind of ethical behaviour from them.
So why don't oil & gas drilling & extraction platforms & their staff accommodation look like this? Is there, perhaps, some reason why lily-pad like structures are impractical for living on in the sea/ocean?
Does this mean that the fossil fuel industry has stopped pretending that they're not one of the main causes of climate change? Do they now accept that their current practice of digging up hydrocarbons out of the ground and turning them into pollution at an ecocidal rate should stop?
Open Access to scientific research is important for a multitude of reasons. For example, education professionals around the world are currently rallying to make their work more (scientific) evidence-informed. The trouble is, they aren't affiliated with universities or other institutions that can provide them with access to the research that is held behind paywalls. Another example is journalists & science writers: We need public access to public research so that a multitude of people can do their jobs more cheaply & better. There's so many up-sides to Open Access publishing &, as far as I've heard so far, no reason to continue with the exorbitant costs that publishers are currently imposing on tax payers, universities, etc..
Impose a fee on Universities and other places that harbor research staff sufficient to support a small staff of editors and the like to coordinate and distribute papers.
The very same researchers, etc. commit to reviewing studies for free.
Papers are submitter, the paid staff categorizes and sends out for review, reviews classify not only if they are publish worthy, but also their normal review process.
All the people involved in writing, reviewing, editing, & most of the publishing process are researchers themselves & do it for the prestige &/or to contribute to the scientific community. The don't get paid anything extra for doing this extra work. Nowadays, academic publishers are glorified shopping cart software providers & little else.
This is pure schadenfreude; enjoying the suffering of rich people who choose to buy exclusive, over-priced, & over-hyped luxury consumer electronics. =)))
...Americans still believe that they live in a democracy where their votes count. That's so cute......and naive of them.
If there was ever an electoral system in need of a complete overhaul, it's the US'. It seems that between them, the DNC & GOP have been gaming the system for so long, it's next to impossible to get nominated, let alone elected, without billionaires' & corporations' support.
How about govt. doing its job & making sure everyone pays their fair share of taxes in order to fund the stuff that everyone needs from their govt., e.g. public transportation, education, healthcare, urban planning, law enforcement & judiciary, & public health & safety, you know, all the stuff that improves the standard of living & quality of life for everyone?
That means everyone, including billionaires & corporations, who are currently starving govts. of the funds they need to provide opportunities, safety, health, & security for everyone.
Or you can carry on marching towards poverty & disenfranchisement because the billionaires & corporations fill the power void left by libertarian ideological "small govt." Does that sound democratic & civilised to you?
...a desktop email client (Thunderbird) and set everything to plain text; incoming & outgoing. No images, only plain text links so that I can see where they're going & what information they're carrying in the query string. I just want to read & write messages. Email's great for that. Don't spoil it.
Wikipedia claims it's an encyclopedia but all too often it strays into the domain of news reporting. Of course people & organisations with power, influence, resources at their disposal, & a public reputation to maintain are going to do everything that can to push back at news reporting that they don't like.
News reporting is the job of journalists, their specialist editors, & their (very necessary) lawyers, not anonymous volunteer academics, experts, & laypeople. If you want to find information about powerful people, corporations, etc., that they'd rather you didn't, check the work of trained, experienced, professional investigative journalists who have sufficient resources & support at their disposal to pursue intensive & sustained investigations. Investigative journalists' professional integrity & therefore livelihood depends on them defending their work against attacks from the powerful, unlike the essentially anonymous volunteer contributors to Wikipedia.
Clearly, Wikipedia doesn't have what it takes to do journalism to a reasonable standard & so they leave themselves vulnerable to the powerful when they try reporting news about them.
Because tech is all about making the world a better place, right? Not about competitive, amoral, unbridled, unregulated, unfettered money making, whatever it takes at all, right?
So Berners-Lee thinks that tech can solve political problems, as opposed to sustaining & augmenting them & making money out of it?
...there's a power outage, or internet goes down, or banks start fleecing business owners with inflated fees, etc..
Also, as long as people still have the option to use cash relatively conveniently, we won't be so susceptible to hyper-exploitative practices by banks & credit card companies that'd make the big telecoms monopolies blush. You know they're just waiting for the opportunity, don't you?
It conflates capitalism with market economy; capitalism is one category of market economy.
It also claims false dichotomies:
In reality, there is no such thing as an entirely capitalist or socialist country. They all have market economies, they all have state- or quasi-state sectors to a greater or lesser degree.
Western European countries such as Norway, Sweden, & Denmark have large state-owned sectors of their economies, i.e. not capitalised, & about 1/3 of all workers in each country is a govt. employee.
Venzuela is less of a socialist country than Germany. The current regime has nationalised its oil industry & put some socialist policies in place to reduce poverty & provide better healthcare. Clearly, the former Venezuelan oligarchs & Washington don't like this & are doing their best to economically vandalise the country in retaliation. That's not an indictment of socialism, that's an indictment of imperialism (which is where capitalism comes from).
I could go on but you were too lazy to post your own arguments... just a link from a biased, divisive, & wilfully ignorant lobbyist.
I mean, the GOP's main strategy is cultivating a divisive climate on hot button topics & in/out-group labelling. They're spending a lot of money on this & are also getting considerable support & amplification from traditional corporate media. Are they annoyed that Russia is spending a fraction of what they are on it & getting all the credit?
Isn't this how VC funding works: Pure RoI from whatever's in fashion at the moment & nothing else matters? I'm not at all surprised by this story. In fact, I'd bet even if Draper had moral objections to Holmes' prior conduct, he wouldn't be able to say them out loud, let alone to the press, for fear of being ostracised in the world of start-up financing.
Slashdot Mirror
Since they're talking about Silicon Valley, I'm assuming that they mean libertarianism as Ayn Rand's version of it, objectivism. Objectivism is for people who read & follow Ayn Rand & haven't yet worked out that it's just an elaborate way of saying anti-social asshole.
...introduced govt. support for unionisation as a way to save capitalism from itself. Without some form of constraint from the govt. or the workers or both, corporations were set to start a Bolshevik revolution. In other words, unions are what keep the Bolsheviks at bay.
It seems that every new generation of capitalists have to learn this the hard way: In the longer term, unions are the least bad option they have.
Amazon already sells a way to prevent radio tracking from devices hidden inside delivery boxes: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=myl... Thieves can bring the boxes back to a room that is also RF shielded, remove the RF tracking devices, deactivate them, & sell them on Amazon & Ebay.
I think a better solution is for Amazon & its customers to stop creating tempting opportunities for theft out in the world we all have to live in. I don't want Amazon to encourage thieves to patrol my neighbourhood looking for opportunities. It's just a really bad idea.
AC's feelings don't care about your facts.
Yes, it's garbage tier, for mice.
Yes, this is an abortion of an article, to mice.
So Yang is launching a TV ad campaign, only, if you want to see it, you have to leave your home & go to a specific place at a specific time to watch it... & Yang might even be watching you watching the ad & then answer some questions on Skype/Facetime.
Yeah, I'm sure it'll catch on.
This is precisely what just about every big IP company, from Disney to Getty & more, do. They're literally stealing control of content from others, including private individuals', CC, & public domain works. Don't like it? Tough: They'll bankrupt you in court regardless of whether their claim of copyright infringement is legitimate or not. It's quicker, cheaper, & less problematic to just pay them for it, and they know it. I'm not against copyright - creatives should get paid - but this isn't what's happening. How copyright law is implemented & enforced needs some major adjustments to level the playing field to make everyone equal under the eyes of the law, regardless of their ability to pay for hoards of corporate lawyers & law firms.
The USA in particular & all countries in general have banned a lot of things. All countries have central planning - That's what makes them countries. The market's not very good at deciding what's right & wrong.
So yet another story confirms that a VC capital funded IT startup has no credibility. Buyer beware. Use at your own risk. Don't expect any kind of ethical behaviour from them.
I wonder what they're like as employers?
So why don't oil & gas drilling & extraction platforms & their staff accommodation look like this? Is there, perhaps, some reason why lily-pad like structures are impractical for living on in the sea/ocean?
Does this mean that the fossil fuel industry has stopped pretending that they're not one of the main causes of climate change? Do they now accept that their current practice of digging up hydrocarbons out of the ground and turning them into pollution at an ecocidal rate should stop?
Open Access to scientific research is important for a multitude of reasons. For example, education professionals around the world are currently rallying to make their work more (scientific) evidence-informed. The trouble is, they aren't affiliated with universities or other institutions that can provide them with access to the research that is held behind paywalls. Another example is journalists & science writers: We need public access to public research so that a multitude of people can do their jobs more cheaply & better. There's so many up-sides to Open Access publishing &, as far as I've heard so far, no reason to continue with the exorbitant costs that publishers are currently imposing on tax payers, universities, etc..
Impose a fee on Universities and other places that harbor research staff sufficient to support a small staff of editors and the like to coordinate and distribute papers.
The very same researchers, etc. commit to reviewing studies for free.
Papers are submitter, the paid staff categorizes and sends out for review, reviews classify not only if they are publish worthy, but also their normal review process.
All the people involved in writing, reviewing, editing, & most of the publishing process are researchers themselves & do it for the prestige &/or to contribute to the scientific community. The don't get paid anything extra for doing this extra work. Nowadays, academic publishers are glorified shopping cart software providers & little else.
This is pure schadenfreude; enjoying the suffering of rich people who choose to buy exclusive, over-priced, & over-hyped luxury consumer electronics. =)))
...Americans still believe that they live in a democracy where their votes count. That's so cute... ...and naive of them.
If there was ever an electoral system in need of a complete overhaul, it's the US'. It seems that between them, the DNC & GOP have been gaming the system for so long, it's next to impossible to get nominated, let alone elected, without billionaires' & corporations' support.
...when we have assholes like Boeing doing it to us anyway?
How about govt. doing its job & making sure everyone pays their fair share of taxes in order to fund the stuff that everyone needs from their govt., e.g. public transportation, education, healthcare, urban planning, law enforcement & judiciary, & public health & safety, you know, all the stuff that improves the standard of living & quality of life for everyone?
That means everyone, including billionaires & corporations, who are currently starving govts. of the funds they need to provide opportunities, safety, health, & security for everyone.
Or you can carry on marching towards poverty & disenfranchisement because the billionaires & corporations fill the power void left by libertarian ideological "small govt." Does that sound democratic & civilised to you?
...a desktop email client (Thunderbird) and set everything to plain text; incoming & outgoing. No images, only plain text links so that I can see where they're going & what information they're carrying in the query string. I just want to read & write messages. Email's great for that. Don't spoil it.
Wikipedia claims it's an encyclopedia but all too often it strays into the domain of news reporting. Of course people & organisations with power, influence, resources at their disposal, & a public reputation to maintain are going to do everything that can to push back at news reporting that they don't like.
News reporting is the job of journalists, their specialist editors, & their (very necessary) lawyers, not anonymous volunteer academics, experts, & laypeople. If you want to find information about powerful people, corporations, etc., that they'd rather you didn't, check the work of trained, experienced, professional investigative journalists who have sufficient resources & support at their disposal to pursue intensive & sustained investigations. Investigative journalists' professional integrity & therefore livelihood depends on them defending their work against attacks from the powerful, unlike the essentially anonymous volunteer contributors to Wikipedia.
Clearly, Wikipedia doesn't have what it takes to do journalism to a reasonable standard & so they leave themselves vulnerable to the powerful when they try reporting news about them.
Because tech is all about making the world a better place, right? Not about competitive, amoral, unbridled, unregulated, unfettered money making, whatever it takes at all, right?
So Berners-Lee thinks that tech can solve political problems, as opposed to sustaining & augmenting them & making money out of it?
...there's a power outage, or internet goes down, or banks start fleecing business owners with inflated fees, etc..
Also, as long as people still have the option to use cash relatively conveniently, we won't be so susceptible to hyper-exploitative practices by banks & credit card companies that'd make the big telecoms monopolies blush. You know they're just waiting for the opportunity, don't you?
https://www.prageru.com/video/capitalism-vs-socialism/
You're welcome.
The arguments in that video are incoherent:
I mean, the GOP's main strategy is cultivating a divisive climate on hot button topics & in/out-group labelling. They're spending a lot of money on this & are also getting considerable support & amplification from traditional corporate media. Are they annoyed that Russia is spending a fraction of what they are on it & getting all the credit?
Isn't this how VC funding works: Pure RoI from whatever's in fashion at the moment & nothing else matters? I'm not at all surprised by this story. In fact, I'd bet even if Draper had moral objections to Holmes' prior conduct, he wouldn't be able to say them out loud, let alone to the press, for fear of being ostracised in the world of start-up financing.