Oh, and instead of $38 each, they should be paying $38000000 dollars apiece. At that kind of money, and with 100 K people pitching in, we are getting closer to a viable enterprise. Of course, for that money, what they will get is to be able to fly their cremated remains to Mars and have them scattered on the surface by an automated probe. Same outcome.
Of course, when you limit the discussion to the ultimate outcome, this is true for just about any activity that can be contemplated. You can live out your life, in all likelihood a mere cog in the machine called civilization, or you can be cremated and have your ashes scattered in some place of significance to you. So, are you planning on killing yourself today, or will you try to do something truly memorable instead?
You're right. How dare anyone question the God-given right of greedy, amoral pigs to exploit and dominate their fellow humans!
Heads up...life has always been a contest, for each creature to struggle and fight with others to survive...in our case, to also live more comfortably and provide for our families, even if that means beating someone else out of things to do so.
Not everyone is born equal in stature or ability. Not everyone is born on the same equal footing to start life out upon.
But, that's nature...always has been, always will be.
Mankind has been able to bend Nature to its will in a number of arenas. Why not this one? We have resources such that everyone could have what they need and much of what they want. We moved out of the jungle a long time ago; it's only still a contest because we choose to make it a contest.
Even this isn't quite true. Why not just change the rules of the contest?
Rather than trying to squeeze more money out of people, why not set the standard by how well people are served by what the person does. Tie reward to that, rather than to how much you are able to take from others, and the world becomes interesting.
A great goal under this philosophy follows from what you said. How many hours of human labor are required to meet the basic needs of a given person? Now, set the goal to reduce those hours needed. Automation, increased efficiency, better lifespan of the tools required to live decently (clothing, shelter, transportation, etc.), and all the rest. Couple that with a goal of sharing the rewards of a well-developed civilization, and the ability to attain and improve on those goals yourself, and the outlook for all the world starts to improve.
I think food doesn't count, in general, unless it as at least "an olive's worth". However, things that impart taste count when they are enough to impart taste. In this case, the pig cells clearly impart taste.
However, the question of eating an amount so small as to be invisible wouldn't have happened. Or at least, would have been considered ridiculous. Just because a pig drowned in the Jordan river wouldn't make the water forbidden.
lol
I don't usually put that in comments, but this one is worthy. I'm pretty sure that most religions have certain elements where hair-splitting is taken to a fine art. The fact that orthodox Jews don't count some things as kosher unless it has (one of) the correct stamp(s) on it is an example.
And yet, from what you said before, that wouldn't hold true for the product you took from the non-kosher pork. Because no one has asked, "How small a piece of pork must I cut before I can eat it and still be kosher?" From the same culture that was around when Leucippus was around?
It is a new technology, and the first thing that happens are the fearmongers coming out. Next come the regulators because they want to enforce the status quo.
Same old thing, we had this with computers, we had this with the Internet
It goes further back than that. I heard that there were some places that required a car to have people with warning flags walk in front of them so that horses and other people wouldn't be surprised or frightened. I'm sure there are examples going back to the first thing that looked like civilization.
Not true. I used to work security in a building that had a lot of electronic locks. And ultimately, you can't enter them without leaving a trace. Sure, they might not know who it is that entered at 2:26 AM, but we would know that somebody entered at that time. Whereas with regular keys, we would at most know that somebody went to that floor around that time, but we'd have no clue as to which door they went into.
In other words, we could probably get video footage of the person that went into the door secured by an electronic lock, or at least narrow it down substantially, but would have no way of doing that with a traditional lock as we would have to have video of them getting into the elevator, not at the actual door.
What's more, with electronic locks, there's the ability to lock people out during periods of the day that you can't do with a traditional lock and you can change the key much more rapidly.
Yes, they aren't perfect and can be prone to attacks that a normal lock and key aren't. But, ultimately, suggesting that they're not any sort of improvement ignores reality.
So, we can spend millions to develop a way to use electronic keys, but no one has ever figured out a way to sync a series of videos so you can watch someone move from one zone to another?
In general, things that are so small they're invisible to the naked eye tend to be Halachically irrelevant. So the fact that a few stem cells from a pig were involved might not render it pork. I can see it being judged Kosher.
Of course, IANAR.
ANY lawyer could then argue that anything is kosher. After all, whatever it is is a collection of individual things that are invisible to the naked eye. Just how homogeneous and cohesive does something have to be before kosher matters?
Well, it was supposed to be a bit of a joke. Most of the hormonal responses to surprise are the same as fear, just less of them (unless the fear is founded). While some predators go for amazingly quick kills, they do seem to be the exception. (There's a clip of an alligator taking out a young gazelle at a pond in about a second. And then they let it rot for days.) And 15 seconds of fear would seem to get you pretty close to the hormonal maximum, anyway.
But what if the stress or fear is what makes real meat taste so good?
Carnivores are evolved to eat freshly hunted and killed prey, not sickly weak prey unaware or uncaring that it's about to die.
Maybe surprise tastes better than stress or fear, and that's why many predators try to catch their prey unawares. A quick burst of "What the..." for that extra something special.
Like it or not, poor oversight can't be removed from a discussion of the technology. If you are building a nuclear plant, you need to be confident that you will be able to maintain responsible oversight/operations/maintenance of the facility for 60 plus years, with oversight/maintenance/storage of the waste for longer. You can have every confidence in the design, in the current owners and the operators when it begins operation, but they will likely be retired if not dead by the time the plant closes. All it takes is one few year period where bad management / operations / regulation comes in and a disaster can happen.
The good news is, we know many of the negative effects of burning coal, and exposure happens right away! Awesome! We've defeated the risk of the unknown!
As far as the GP's assertion that if an engineer designed it, then it's good. That's bullshit too. Many jurisdictions base their codes on national standards, and the engineer needs to be familiar with the codes for the property in question. For example, if code says a 2x10 floor joist can span x feet. The engineer can't make the span x+1 and say "a little deflection is acceptable". It will fail inspection, builder will have to remedy the problem, and the person paying the bills is going to sue the engineer for the additional costs.
Of course, you neglect to mention that any engineer who wants to keep his stamp won't actually use it on something he knows is against code. It's not just a ring you get when you graduate.
Would a difference of at most 10.8% difference in the benchmark results have changed your choice? Or would you still have bought the Galaxy S4 for its features?
Let's turn that around and see how it works. Will a difference of at most 10.8% make the phone more desirable, such that it would not only cover the costs of coding this check, but make us an appreciable amount of money? Is seems that Samsung says, "Yes." That's why people are saying they're being fuckers. They are intentionally trying to give misleading impressions. Don't pretend it is about anything else.
I have to wonder about the Microsoft corporate strategy to keep changing the interfaces to their OS with each release.
Imagine if all changes were on the back end (security, improved networking, etc) and only a handful of changes were made with the front end. Windows would have millions of content and loyal users. And nobody would ever want to change.
Personally, I think it's for keeping training costs up. With every new version, they can move a few options around, and all of a sudden your admin guys need a new certification to be current. And the old certification is retired, so if you don't recertify you will soon have no valid certification. The same applies for Office, development tools, etc. I'm not saying every change is for this, but from what I've seen, far too many are.
This isn't going to make it easier to convince companies to adopt the GPL.
That ship has long since sailed. Linux is being used on a gazillion different devices and nobody cares about Fartec or whoever.
Using a GPL'd piece of software doesn't mean you've adopted GPL - it as often as not means you're using the most inexpensive product on the market, and all they know about GPL is that it's the title of the license they clicked "I Accept" to without reading (if they read that much). My mom uses OO.o because she can't be bothered to pay $100 to write up fairly standard documents. I use LibreOffice because I dislike Microsoft's desire to capture markets using closed standards (and not OO.o because I updated my system after setting up my mom's). The number of people who use Linux, for example, is likely far greater than the number or people who develop GPL software, as should be expected. This is certainly true if you include Android, which is a legitimate option.
I don't mean to marginalize those who adopt GPL'd software for purely financial reasons. I personally can't think of a better statement of support for GPL'd software in general and Linux in particular than millions of people have decided that it is the superior product with no bias given by their personal philosophy.
Not only did they not exercise due diligence to start with, it appears that when asked to comply with the license by posting the code they actually used, the company lied and said they weren't using iptables...I think that's the big takeaway - when you mess up, don't lie and initiate a cover-up, just fix it and move on.
I missed that part, and yes, trying to cover it up only hurts. I still expect a fair number of management employees to walk away with the soundbite that GPL equals lawsuits.
This isn't going to make it easier to convince companies to adopt the GPL. It's not necessarily accurate, since Fantec clearly didn't exercise due diligence with their third-party software, but that's what a lot of upper management is going to hear.
I don't doubt the theoretical potential for this to be FUDed; but it isn't as though Fantec would have been any better off if their shoddy firmware contractor had been out of compliance with code under any other licence... Somehow, the fact that you can get your ass handed to you for violating software licenses seems to be Super Scary when it's OSS; but just part of doing business when it's proprietary; but it's the same principle at work either way.
If the Fantec product had been proprietary, they wouldn't have been under violation, and they couldn't have verified if there was a licensing issue with any firmware provided by their supplier, which would have been noted in any good contract. The supplier, if anyone would have been on the hook for license violations (assuming the firmware had any code they didn't own), and Fantec may have gotten an injunction against sales of their product (at least until new, complaint firmware was in place)
Face it, there are a lot of new and different things you have to be aware of when going down the OSS road. These things are no worse than the traditional methods, just different And that different can land you in court and cost you piles of cash of varying sizes. The two options are like riding a horse versus driving a horse-drawn wagon. Superficially, they are a lot alike, even use the same engine, but there are key features that are different, and need to be taken into account.
This isn't going to make it easier to convince companies to adopt the GPL. It's not necessarily accurate, since Fantec clearly didn't exercise due diligence with their third-party software, but that's what a lot of upper management is going to hear.
It's not a new idea - I read a book years ago about a guy who goes back in time and helps some creatures migrate out of the Mediterranean basin when Gibraltar opens up. That said, I'm sure this series is an excellent treatment of the concept, and will have to read it.
Google wheat varieties, and gmo wheat varieties. From what I can see, there are a handful of GMO wheat varieties, about 2 dozen non-GMO varieties (start with wikipedia and branch out). Something tells me that non-GMO isn't quite the same thing as monoculture. Not too surprising to some of us - they don't even sound the same.
The city planners should have thought about this before deciding to put the town there.
Do you know how most cities got sited? Availability of water, good harbors (very important historically), workable land and other needed resources.
There is almost never a set of city planners that sit down and weigh all the pros and cons of a location... they just tend to initially happen as people find what they need and start laying down roots.
If you live in the North, you take what you can get. These guys are just trying to improve a little on that.
Washington DC used to be a malarial swamp and New Orleans is apparently below sea level. Did the city planners do a piss-poor job? Or were there other features that made it desirable?
Nobody comes along and says "we're going to build a thriving city here" -- well, China has apparently done it, and they're empty. I suspect most cities started in a much more random and organic manner.
This doesn't mean decisions weren't made based on the viability of a given location. If you think about it, the very definition of a thriving city is a location where a large number of people have thought it was worth living there. "Planned cities" are places where a few people thought it was worth living there, and the data tends to show they were wrong.
Now that we all know we're being surveilled, I can understand why others may not make similar posts, but I'm going to risk it and say it anyway.
I read the previous slashdot article on the amendment. I immediately called my representative. He voted YES!
Even if the ship sinks, I still feel very good about this moment. The system may be dysfunctional, but at least some of us are still doing the right thing.
The worst thing we can do is succumb to despair. It may take some really tough times to happen, but we WILL eventually emerge on the other side with a better system. It's what life always manages to do, no matter how dark the times become.
Keeping in mind that those dark times have lasted for a thousand years before. Still, all the more reason to push back against total collapse.
>. noting that the socialist regimes that have failed have been authoritarian
Indeed when the government controls people's money (socialism), eventually the government controls people's lives (authoritarian).
That fact is so obviously true it's almost a tautology. If you are itellectualy honest, you will recognize that obvious fact and work from there towards an alternate means of reaching your goal.
If you're a fool, you'll stick your fingers in your ears and pretend that government control doesn't result in government control.
Yes, it's very wonderful living in those places where the government has no control over their subjects. Somehow, without this control, people get along just fine, even without law enforcement, because they're all good and try extra hard since the government has left it all to them.
Clearly, for any large group of people, there has to be some amount of control, simply to enforce the rules which have been agreed on by the group (or not agreed on by the group, in some cases). So the real question is, how much control should the government have? None at all demonstrably fails (this includes free market capitalism), and too much demonstrably fails. And there's the difficulty: the answer, if there is an answer, lies somewhere in the middle. That may include socialism.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and instead of $38 each, they should be paying $38000000 dollars apiece. At that kind of money, and with 100 K people pitching in, we are getting closer to a viable enterprise. Of course, for that money, what they will get is to be able to fly their cremated remains to Mars and have them scattered on the surface by an automated probe. Same outcome.
Of course, when you limit the discussion to the ultimate outcome, this is true for just about any activity that can be contemplated. You can live out your life, in all likelihood a mere cog in the machine called civilization, or you can be cremated and have your ashes scattered in some place of significance to you. So, are you planning on killing yourself today, or will you try to do something truly memorable instead?
Heads up...life has always been a contest, for each creature to struggle and fight with others to survive...in our case, to also live more comfortably and provide for our families, even if that means beating someone else out of things to do so.
Not everyone is born equal in stature or ability. Not everyone is born on the same equal footing to start life out upon.
But, that's nature...always has been, always will be.
Mankind has been able to bend Nature to its will in a number of arenas. Why not this one? We have resources such that everyone could have what they need and much of what they want. We moved out of the jungle a long time ago; it's only still a contest because we choose to make it a contest.
Even this isn't quite true. Why not just change the rules of the contest?
Rather than trying to squeeze more money out of people, why not set the standard by how well people are served by what the person does. Tie reward to that, rather than to how much you are able to take from others, and the world becomes interesting.
A great goal under this philosophy follows from what you said. How many hours of human labor are required to meet the basic needs of a given person? Now, set the goal to reduce those hours needed. Automation, increased efficiency, better lifespan of the tools required to live decently (clothing, shelter, transportation, etc.), and all the rest. Couple that with a goal of sharing the rewards of a well-developed civilization, and the ability to attain and improve on those goals yourself, and the outlook for all the world starts to improve.
I think food doesn't count, in general, unless it as at least "an olive's worth". However, things that impart taste count when they are enough to impart taste. In this case, the pig cells clearly impart taste.
However, the question of eating an amount so small as to be invisible wouldn't have happened. Or at least, would have been considered ridiculous. Just because a pig drowned in the Jordan river wouldn't make the water forbidden.
lol
I don't usually put that in comments, but this one is worthy. I'm pretty sure that most religions have certain elements where hair-splitting is taken to a fine art. The fact that orthodox Jews don't count some things as kosher unless it has (one of) the correct stamp(s) on it is an example.
And yet, from what you said before, that wouldn't hold true for the product you took from the non-kosher pork. Because no one has asked, "How small a piece of pork must I cut before I can eat it and still be kosher?" From the same culture that was around when Leucippus was around?
It is a new technology, and the first thing that happens are the fearmongers coming out. Next come the regulators because they want to enforce the status quo.
Same old thing, we had this with computers, we had this with the Internet
It goes further back than that. I heard that there were some places that required a car to have people with warning flags walk in front of them so that horses and other people wouldn't be surprised or frightened. I'm sure there are examples going back to the first thing that looked like civilization.
Not true. I used to work security in a building that had a lot of electronic locks. And ultimately, you can't enter them without leaving a trace. Sure, they might not know who it is that entered at 2:26 AM, but we would know that somebody entered at that time. Whereas with regular keys, we would at most know that somebody went to that floor around that time, but we'd have no clue as to which door they went into.
In other words, we could probably get video footage of the person that went into the door secured by an electronic lock, or at least narrow it down substantially, but would have no way of doing that with a traditional lock as we would have to have video of them getting into the elevator, not at the actual door.
What's more, with electronic locks, there's the ability to lock people out during periods of the day that you can't do with a traditional lock and you can change the key much more rapidly.
Yes, they aren't perfect and can be prone to attacks that a normal lock and key aren't. But, ultimately, suggesting that they're not any sort of improvement ignores reality.
So, we can spend millions to develop a way to use electronic keys, but no one has ever figured out a way to sync a series of videos so you can watch someone move from one zone to another?
Just add enough enough worcestershire sauce and it'll be fine.
Ah, another traditional British chef. Just what we needed.
In general, things that are so small they're invisible to the naked eye tend to be Halachically irrelevant. So the fact that a few stem cells from a pig were involved might not render it pork. I can see it being judged Kosher.
Of course, IANAR.
ANY lawyer could then argue that anything is kosher. After all, whatever it is is a collection of individual things that are invisible to the naked eye. Just how homogeneous and cohesive does something have to be before kosher matters?
Well, it was supposed to be a bit of a joke. Most of the hormonal responses to surprise are the same as fear, just less of them (unless the fear is founded). While some predators go for amazingly quick kills, they do seem to be the exception. (There's a clip of an alligator taking out a young gazelle at a pond in about a second. And then they let it rot for days.) And 15 seconds of fear would seem to get you pretty close to the hormonal maximum, anyway.
But what if the stress or fear is what makes real meat taste so good?
Carnivores are evolved to eat freshly hunted and killed prey, not sickly weak prey unaware or uncaring that it's about to die.
Maybe surprise tastes better than stress or fear, and that's why many predators try to catch their prey unawares. A quick burst of "What the..." for that extra something special.
Like it or not, poor oversight can't be removed from a discussion of the technology. If you are building a nuclear plant, you need to be confident that you will be able to maintain responsible oversight/operations/maintenance of the facility for 60 plus years, with oversight/maintenance/storage of the waste for longer. You can have every confidence in the design, in the current owners and the operators when it begins operation, but they will likely be retired if not dead by the time the plant closes. All it takes is one few year period where bad management / operations / regulation comes in and a disaster can happen.
The good news is, we know many of the negative effects of burning coal, and exposure happens right away! Awesome! We've defeated the risk of the unknown!
At least they dropped the apostasy charges, right? Right?
These people need more Voltaire. *sigh*
As far as the GP's assertion that if an engineer designed it, then it's good. That's bullshit too. Many jurisdictions base their codes on national standards, and the engineer needs to be familiar with the codes for the property in question. For example, if code says a 2x10 floor joist can span x feet. The engineer can't make the span x+1 and say "a little deflection is acceptable". It will fail inspection, builder will have to remedy the problem, and the person paying the bills is going to sue the engineer for the additional costs.
Of course, you neglect to mention that any engineer who wants to keep his stamp won't actually use it on something he knows is against code. It's not just a ring you get when you graduate.
Here's an example from my part of the world.
Would a difference of at most 10.8% difference in the benchmark results have changed your choice? Or would you still have bought the Galaxy S4 for its features?
Let's turn that around and see how it works. Will a difference of at most 10.8% make the phone more desirable, such that it would not only cover the costs of coding this check, but make us an appreciable amount of money? Is seems that Samsung says, "Yes." That's why people are saying they're being fuckers. They are intentionally trying to give misleading impressions. Don't pretend it is about anything else.
I have to wonder about the Microsoft corporate strategy to keep changing the interfaces to their OS with each release. Imagine if all changes were on the back end (security, improved networking, etc) and only a handful of changes were made with the front end. Windows would have millions of content and loyal users. And nobody would ever want to change.
Personally, I think it's for keeping training costs up. With every new version, they can move a few options around, and all of a sudden your admin guys need a new certification to be current. And the old certification is retired, so if you don't recertify you will soon have no valid certification. The same applies for Office, development tools, etc. I'm not saying every change is for this, but from what I've seen, far too many are.
This method can also make entire clones. And remember, clones are always hot and wear thermal bandages.
Well, that's just reasonable. Why would you add additional, unwanted material to the model? It's expensive and takes longer!
This isn't going to make it easier to convince companies to adopt the GPL.
That ship has long since sailed. Linux is being used on a gazillion different devices and nobody cares about Fartec or whoever.
Using a GPL'd piece of software doesn't mean you've adopted GPL - it as often as not means you're using the most inexpensive product on the market, and all they know about GPL is that it's the title of the license they clicked "I Accept" to without reading (if they read that much). My mom uses OO.o because she can't be bothered to pay $100 to write up fairly standard documents. I use LibreOffice because I dislike Microsoft's desire to capture markets using closed standards (and not OO.o because I updated my system after setting up my mom's). The number of people who use Linux, for example, is likely far greater than the number or people who develop GPL software, as should be expected. This is certainly true if you include Android, which is a legitimate option.
I don't mean to marginalize those who adopt GPL'd software for purely financial reasons. I personally can't think of a better statement of support for GPL'd software in general and Linux in particular than millions of people have decided that it is the superior product with no bias given by their personal philosophy.
Not only did they not exercise due diligence to start with, it appears that when asked to comply with the license by posting the code they actually used, the company lied and said they weren't using iptables...I think that's the big takeaway - when you mess up, don't lie and initiate a cover-up, just fix it and move on.
I missed that part, and yes, trying to cover it up only hurts. I still expect a fair number of management employees to walk away with the soundbite that GPL equals lawsuits.
This isn't going to make it easier to convince companies to adopt the GPL. It's not necessarily accurate, since Fantec clearly didn't exercise due diligence with their third-party software, but that's what a lot of upper management is going to hear.
I don't doubt the theoretical potential for this to be FUDed; but it isn't as though Fantec would have been any better off if their shoddy firmware contractor had been out of compliance with code under any other licence... Somehow, the fact that you can get your ass handed to you for violating software licenses seems to be Super Scary when it's OSS; but just part of doing business when it's proprietary; but it's the same principle at work either way.
If the Fantec product had been proprietary, they wouldn't have been under violation, and they couldn't have verified if there was a licensing issue with any firmware provided by their supplier, which would have been noted in any good contract. The supplier, if anyone would have been on the hook for license violations (assuming the firmware had any code they didn't own), and Fantec may have gotten an injunction against sales of their product (at least until new, complaint firmware was in place)
Face it, there are a lot of new and different things you have to be aware of when going down the OSS road. These things are no worse than the traditional methods, just different And that different can land you in court and cost you piles of cash of varying sizes. The two options are like riding a horse versus driving a horse-drawn wagon. Superficially, they are a lot alike, even use the same engine, but there are key features that are different, and need to be taken into account.
This isn't going to make it easier to convince companies to adopt the GPL. It's not necessarily accurate, since Fantec clearly didn't exercise due diligence with their third-party software, but that's what a lot of upper management is going to hear.
It's not a new idea - I read a book years ago about a guy who goes back in time and helps some creatures migrate out of the Mediterranean basin when Gibraltar opens up. That said, I'm sure this series is an excellent treatment of the concept, and will have to read it.
Google wheat varieties, and gmo wheat varieties. From what I can see, there are a handful of GMO wheat varieties, about 2 dozen non-GMO varieties (start with wikipedia and branch out). Something tells me that non-GMO isn't quite the same thing as monoculture. Not too surprising to some of us - they don't even sound the same.
Do you know how most cities got sited? Availability of water, good harbors (very important historically), workable land and other needed resources.
There is almost never a set of city planners that sit down and weigh all the pros and cons of a location ... they just tend to initially happen as people find what they need and start laying down roots.
If you live in the North, you take what you can get. These guys are just trying to improve a little on that.
Washington DC used to be a malarial swamp and New Orleans is apparently below sea level. Did the city planners do a piss-poor job? Or were there other features that made it desirable?
Nobody comes along and says "we're going to build a thriving city here" -- well, China has apparently done it, and they're empty. I suspect most cities started in a much more random and organic manner.
This doesn't mean decisions weren't made based on the viability of a given location. If you think about it, the very definition of a thriving city is a location where a large number of people have thought it was worth living there. "Planned cities" are places where a few people thought it was worth living there, and the data tends to show they were wrong.
Now that we all know we're being surveilled, I can understand why others may not make similar posts, but I'm going to risk it and say it anyway. I read the previous slashdot article on the amendment. I immediately called my representative. He voted YES! Even if the ship sinks, I still feel very good about this moment. The system may be dysfunctional, but at least some of us are still doing the right thing. The worst thing we can do is succumb to despair. It may take some really tough times to happen, but we WILL eventually emerge on the other side with a better system. It's what life always manages to do, no matter how dark the times become.
Keeping in mind that those dark times have lasted for a thousand years before. Still, all the more reason to push back against total collapse.
>. noting that the socialist regimes that have failed have been authoritarian Indeed when the government controls people's money (socialism), eventually the government controls people's lives (authoritarian). That fact is so obviously true it's almost a tautology. If you are itellectualy honest, you will recognize that obvious fact and work from there towards an alternate means of reaching your goal. If you're a fool, you'll stick your fingers in your ears and pretend that government control doesn't result in government control.
Yes, it's very wonderful living in those places where the government has no control over their subjects. Somehow, without this control, people get along just fine, even without law enforcement, because they're all good and try extra hard since the government has left it all to them.
Clearly, for any large group of people, there has to be some amount of control, simply to enforce the rules which have been agreed on by the group (or not agreed on by the group, in some cases). So the real question is, how much control should the government have? None at all demonstrably fails (this includes free market capitalism), and too much demonstrably fails. And there's the difficulty: the answer, if there is an answer, lies somewhere in the middle. That may include socialism.