Schools or scientific exploration and what not can't entirely be provided privately, so it needs to be tax-payer funded. A private road system wouldn't work, you can only have one road outside of your house, law and order can't br private.
However...there is no need or cause for tax-funded Internet access. Anyone who needs it can afford it. Basic dial-up is dirt cheap. I'd bet that 99% of people who would use it already have a private Internet connection. The other 1% just don't really care enough to buy one packet of cigarettes less a month to pay for it.
Notice how there's no tax-payer funded electricity, gas or water, you have to pay a corporation for it.
No. But if I start a business I will treat my employees as machines. I.e. I give them money, they do a job. They're not people, they're entities designed to fullfil a purpose. If they don't like it, they can go on the dole. See how they like that. People are too ungrateful for their jobs these days. Even if your boss is treating you like shit, you should praise him for giving you a job so you can feed your family. That's capitalism, what seperates us from the animals.
If the underlings have superior skill and intellect, why do they get exploited? Skillful and intelligent people don't allow themselves to be trodden on.
It's not a psychopathic tendency to actually have the balls and the charisma to rise through the ranks whilst your supposedly superior underlings sit there whining in their cubicles and putting Dilbert cartoons on the wall.
How many bosses actually handle billions of dollars?
To stay on topic, I'd say that being a psychopath would help in management. You can't look up on your employees as human beings, that leads to soft management, you need to see them as machines there to do a task.
Unsubtle religious symbolism is no substitute for a plot, dialogue, characters or acting.
Perhaps you'd enjoy a film which consisted of 5 minutes of a fat man having a big sweaty shit, and then 2 hours of cardboard characters philosophising about the shit, along with religious symbolism about how the shit represents some ancient religious text or something. All the fans could meet up at Starbucks and talk about it over $8 cups of coffee.
The shuttle may be "flawed" as you put it. Or maybe spaceflight is just dangerous? Do we really have reason to believe the next generation craft is going to be safer
What makes you think that spaceflight was perfected in 1981? I'd be very surprised if space technology hasn't progressed an inch in 24 years, especially with all the money they get. Maybe NASA should stop hobbling alternatives and start helping them instead.
It's still stealing though, as they've stolen your percentage of the company, even though financially you're no worse off. It should be illegal.
As far as I'm concerned, if you own 1% of the company, you own 1% of the company, and that's it. The stock market is a sham. What if the majority shareholders create more shares and just keep them, they could artificially increase their control of the company without buying anyone else's shares. It seems that this shares business is just a funny way of raising money from nothing.
Seriously reconsider that. It cuts off a whole load of nerves so you can't feel stimulation the same, tightens the skin along the shaft so you can't wank it properly, it means that skin around the base of the penis is pulled up along the shaft so the bottom end of your cock is hairy. And the exposed head rubs on your underpants, giving it a rougher surface, making sex less enjoyable for women.
In fact, unless you have a serious medical problem, circumcision has nothing but negative consequences.
OK that was just an example number. What if you owned 1%. Then they released more shares so your 1% is only worth 0.5%. Surely they can't do that? They're effectively stealing your part of the company. Imagine if your next door neighbour 'released' ten square feet of your garden and sold them.
How can they take away your share of the company? Does that mean, if for instance someone owns 50% of Google, they could release five times as many shares, making that 50% worth only 10%? Surely then there's no point in buying any shares, as Google could just release more and more to make yours worthless.
Maybe that's a new way to make money: 1. Start company worth £1000 2. Sell half the shares for £500, leaving you with 50%. 3. Release a load more shares so your 50% is now worth 99%, and the 50% you sold is worth 1%. 4. Release even more, always leaving you with 99% but filling your pockets. 5. Eventually people stop buying them, and you go and live on an island.
I bet that classrooms in the 1920s were a hell of a lot more disciplined than they are today. Ever looked in a school recently? They're like war zones. The teachers have no authority, they can't even look at kids the wrong way without being sacked/sued/jailed.
No-one's talking about a savage beating, just the cane. Kids have too many 'rights' these days. As far as I'm concerned, kids have the 'right' to do as they're damn well told, and nothing else. Soon it'll be illegal to make them do homework or even go school at all in case it hurts their feelings.
The whole point of corporal punishment isn't to punish or dissuade individual incidents, it's to let them know who's in charge.
It's not surprising that schools with the harshest discipline get the best results, and so are the schools where all the parents want to send their kids.
But cryptography is breakable, especially by terrorists with their massive resources. It can't be relied upon to be accurate. That's why orders for launching nukes on submarines have to be delivered by normal non-electronic mail.
In fact your post itself is even an advert, for the advertising industry:
not to mention a privacy nut, avid slashdot reader, gamer, geek, etc)
Step 1: Artificially try to validate yourself to the audience. Spit out a list of attributes common to the people you're talking in an attempt to suck up.
because that generates better results. I repeat: IT GENERATES BETTER RESULTS! This means that due to it being targeted better, people are buying more!
Step 2: Pretend like you treat your audience with respect, then treat them like idiots immediately afterwards. That sort of obnoxious repetition and spelling out the obvoius is one of the main tricks of advertisers to dumb things down.
we inform them of the product and they make the decision to buy.
Step 3: Lie outright. I can't remember the last time I saw an advert that was nothing but informative, I can't remember an advert that actually gave straight facts. I don't know if there's ever been one.
all of these get passed on by people like you because you find them interesting, clever, and entertaining. THAT is the goal of most advertising agencies. Believe it or not, we LIKE making good ads that people like.
Step 4: Contradict yourself. Talk about informing in one paragraph, then in the next talk about crap videos that have NOTHING to do with the product and don't tell ANYTHING about them. That defeats your point, as such adverts are nothing but hype and marketing, which insults the viewer.
If people want some proof that good advertising exists, check out the Cannes Lion Awards. They have videos of all the winners, and I'm sure most Slashdotters would approve.
Step 5: Talk about good advertising, and then refer to adverts which are patronising and non-informing.
What a load of crap. Advertisers care about one thing: as many results as possible, and they don't care how many people they piss off. All that matters is sales, advertisers are completely amoral.
The world would be a better place if all 'young ad execs' were all put on a ship and sent to the Arctic, then the boat sunk. Adverts are nothing but irritating, infuriating and patronising. They are NEVER useful, except to the companies involved. Only idiots base their purchase decisions on adverts.
64,000 hours, at 8 hours a day, is 40000 days, or 218 years, so you're not too far off the 640-year mark.
Your numbers are off. 64,000 hours at 16 hours a day is 4,000 days, or 11 years. That's a reasonable sentence. The work could be laying bricks in Siberia or digging irrigation ditches in the Sahara. Five minute water/food break at lunchtime. Perhaps a toilet break mid-afternoon.
It needs more than that. You're forgetting the studio costs, electricity costs (HUGE), water, food, makeup, sound men, not to mention all the hidden costs, like the people who find people to appear on the programme, transport costs and what not.
Say the director makes £1000/week, 6 x camera staff £400, 5 x sound crew £400, electricity, £10,000, 2 x makeup staff £300, say £5,000 a week for the rest of the costs, £500 transport, that's £21,000 per week. At a few thousand subscribers, they'd have to pay £5 an episode to watch. No chance of that.
Also the problem with this model is that if programmes cost individually, people won't try watching programmes they haven't seen before as if they don't like it they're out of pocket. Once you've paid for a channel you can watch anything for free.
Actually, naive idealists do nothing. Do you think the losers here who hate copyright, patents, profit and capitalism get anything done? No, it's the businessmen who live in reality. Once you get out of school/Slashdot, living in a fantasy just leads to being slapped in the face by reality.
The slashbots with the entitlement complex just sit in office cubicles or flipping burgers doing nothing, waiting for the day when the world turns into an RMS-lead commune.
When it's available on x86, a lot of Apple's customer base stop buying Apple hardware and get OSX on x86 instead. Then they realise it's easy to pirate. Then Apple's business model collapses.
You know the GNAA doesn't actually exist, it's just something people troll about. I bet all sorts of people put crap onto P2P just for a laugh. But if you're illegally pirating software I don't think you can expect any support or sympathy if you end up with goatsex.
Slashdot Mirror
Schools or scientific exploration and what not can't entirely be provided privately, so it needs to be tax-payer funded. A private road system wouldn't work, you can only have one road outside of your house, law and order can't br private.
However...there is no need or cause for tax-funded Internet access. Anyone who needs it can afford it. Basic dial-up is dirt cheap. I'd bet that 99% of people who would use it already have a private Internet connection. The other 1% just don't really care enough to buy one packet of cigarettes less a month to pay for it.
Notice how there's no tax-payer funded electricity, gas or water, you have to pay a corporation for it.
but kicking out player when they're winning is poor sportsmanship/i?
Casinos aren't in the business of sportsmanship, they're in the business of making money. Professional card counters are bad for business.
Why would they give them free drinks? As a reward for taking money from them?
No. But if I start a business I will treat my employees as machines. I.e. I give them money, they do a job. They're not people, they're entities designed to fullfil a purpose. If they don't like it, they can go on the dole. See how they like that. People are too ungrateful for their jobs these days. Even if your boss is treating you like shit, you should praise him for giving you a job so you can feed your family. That's capitalism, what seperates us from the animals.
How does it stop you navigating web pages? It just sits there at the top of the screen, out of the way.
If the underlings have superior skill and intellect, why do they get exploited? Skillful and intelligent people don't allow themselves to be trodden on.
It's not a psychopathic tendency to actually have the balls and the charisma to rise through the ranks whilst your supposedly superior underlings sit there whining in their cubicles and putting Dilbert cartoons on the wall.
How many bosses actually handle billions of dollars?
To stay on topic, I'd say that being a psychopath would help in management. You can't look up on your employees as human beings, that leads to soft management, you need to see them as machines there to do a task.
Unsubtle religious symbolism is no substitute for a plot, dialogue, characters or acting.
Perhaps you'd enjoy a film which consisted of 5 minutes of a fat man having a big sweaty shit, and then 2 hours of cardboard characters philosophising about the shit, along with religious symbolism about how the shit represents some ancient religious text or something. All the fans could meet up at Starbucks and talk about it over $8 cups of coffee.
The shuttle may be "flawed" as you put it. Or maybe spaceflight is just dangerous? Do we really have reason to believe the next generation craft is going to be safer
What makes you think that spaceflight was perfected in 1981? I'd be very surprised if space technology hasn't progressed an inch in 24 years, especially with all the money they get. Maybe NASA should stop hobbling alternatives and start helping them instead.
It's still stealing though, as they've stolen your percentage of the company, even though financially you're no worse off. It should be illegal.
As far as I'm concerned, if you own 1% of the company, you own 1% of the company, and that's it. The stock market is a sham. What if the majority shareholders create more shares and just keep them, they could artificially increase their control of the company without buying anyone else's shares. It seems that this shares business is just a funny way of raising money from nothing.
Seriously reconsider that. It cuts off a whole load of nerves so you can't feel stimulation the same, tightens the skin along the shaft so you can't wank it properly, it means that skin around the base of the penis is pulled up along the shaft so the bottom end of your cock is hairy. And the exposed head rubs on your underpants, giving it a rougher surface, making sex less enjoyable for women.
In fact, unless you have a serious medical problem, circumcision has nothing but negative consequences.
OK that was just an example number. What if you owned 1%. Then they released more shares so your 1% is only worth 0.5%. Surely they can't do that? They're effectively stealing your part of the company. Imagine if your next door neighbour 'released' ten square feet of your garden and sold them.
How can they take away your share of the company? Does that mean, if for instance someone owns 50% of Google, they could release five times as many shares, making that 50% worth only 10%? Surely then there's no point in buying any shares, as Google could just release more and more to make yours worthless.
Maybe that's a new way to make money:
1. Start company worth £1000
2. Sell half the shares for £500, leaving you with 50%.
3. Release a load more shares so your 50% is now worth 99%, and the 50% you sold is worth 1%.
4. Release even more, always leaving you with 99% but filling your pockets.
5. Eventually people stop buying them, and you go and live on an island.
Grey squirrels
Killer wasps/bees
Rats
I bet that classrooms in the 1920s were a hell of a lot more disciplined than they are today. Ever looked in a school recently? They're like war zones. The teachers have no authority, they can't even look at kids the wrong way without being sacked/sued/jailed.
No-one's talking about a savage beating, just the cane. Kids have too many 'rights' these days. As far as I'm concerned, kids have the 'right' to do as they're damn well told, and nothing else. Soon it'll be illegal to make them do homework or even go school at all in case it hurts their feelings.
The whole point of corporal punishment isn't to punish or dissuade individual incidents, it's to let them know who's in charge.
It's not surprising that schools with the harshest discipline get the best results, and so are the schools where all the parents want to send their kids.
I have dialup and I have access to this 'powerful learning tool', even though most information on the Internet is either wrong or biased.
But the truth is broadband is mainly used for piracy and porn. You can get to wikipedia's amateur articles with dial-up just fine.
But cryptography is breakable, especially by terrorists with their massive resources. It can't be relied upon to be accurate. That's why orders for launching nukes on submarines have to be delivered by normal non-electronic mail.
In fact your post itself is even an advert, for the advertising industry:
not to mention a privacy nut, avid slashdot reader, gamer, geek, etc)
Step 1: Artificially try to validate yourself to the audience. Spit out a list of attributes common to the people you're talking in an attempt to suck up.
because that generates better results. I repeat: IT GENERATES BETTER RESULTS! This means that due to it being targeted better, people are buying more!
Step 2: Pretend like you treat your audience with respect, then treat them like idiots immediately afterwards. That sort of obnoxious repetition and spelling out the obvoius is one of the main tricks of advertisers to dumb things down.
we inform them of the product and they make the decision to buy.
Step 3: Lie outright. I can't remember the last time I saw an advert that was nothing but informative, I can't remember an advert that actually gave straight facts. I don't know if there's ever been one.
all of these get passed on by people like you because you find them interesting, clever, and entertaining. THAT is the goal of most advertising agencies. Believe it or not, we LIKE making good ads that people like.
Step 4: Contradict yourself. Talk about informing in one paragraph, then in the next talk about crap videos that have NOTHING to do with the product and don't tell ANYTHING about them. That defeats your point, as such adverts are nothing but hype and marketing, which insults the viewer.
If people want some proof that good advertising exists, check out the Cannes Lion Awards. They have videos of all the winners, and I'm sure most Slashdotters would approve.
Step 5: Talk about good advertising, and then refer to adverts which are patronising and non-informing.
What a load of crap. Advertisers care about one thing: as many results as possible, and they don't care how many people they piss off. All that matters is sales, advertisers are completely amoral.
The world would be a better place if all 'young ad execs' were all put on a ship and sent to the Arctic, then the boat sunk. Adverts are nothing but irritating, infuriating and patronising. They are NEVER useful, except to the companies involved. Only idiots base their purchase decisions on adverts.
Perhaps liquid hydrogen, but you'd have to watch out in case some foam fell off the computer, killing everyone in the room.
64,000 hours, at 8 hours a day, is 40000 days, or 218 years, so you're not too far off the 640-year mark.
Your numbers are off. 64,000 hours at 16 hours a day is 4,000 days, or 11 years. That's a reasonable sentence. The work could be laying bricks in Siberia or digging irrigation ditches in the Sahara. Five minute water/food break at lunchtime. Perhaps a toilet break mid-afternoon.
It needs more than that. You're forgetting the studio costs, electricity costs (HUGE), water, food, makeup, sound men, not to mention all the hidden costs, like the people who find people to appear on the programme, transport costs and what not.
Say the director makes £1000/week, 6 x camera staff £400, 5 x sound crew £400, electricity, £10,000, 2 x makeup staff £300, say £5,000 a week for the rest of the costs, £500 transport, that's £21,000 per week. At a few thousand subscribers, they'd have to pay £5 an episode to watch. No chance of that.
Also the problem with this model is that if programmes cost individually, people won't try watching programmes they haven't seen before as if they don't like it they're out of pocket. Once you've paid for a channel you can watch anything for free.
Actually, naive idealists do nothing. Do you think the losers here who hate copyright, patents, profit and capitalism get anything done? No, it's the businessmen who live in reality. Once you get out of school/Slashdot, living in a fantasy just leads to being slapped in the face by reality.
The slashbots with the entitlement complex just sit in office cubicles or flipping burgers doing nothing, waiting for the day when the world turns into an RMS-lead commune.
When it's available on x86, a lot of Apple's customer base stop buying Apple hardware and get OSX on x86 instead. Then they realise it's easy to pirate. Then Apple's business model collapses.
You know the GNAA doesn't actually exist, it's just something people troll about. I bet all sorts of people put crap onto P2P just for a laugh. But if you're illegally pirating software I don't think you can expect any support or sympathy if you end up with goatsex.
He learnt that employment is just misery and futility, and not worth anyone's time. It takes some people a lifetime to learn that.