This is a legal tennis match that will go on for years - interminable, boring, but at the end there will be a winner. I'm just rooting for Google - on this one, I believe they have it right.
"Sorry, that is bull. There is no workplace neither in the US, nor in any other country where a union can force you to join. If you don't want to partake in collective bargaining, don't complain when your colleagues get a raise while you get nada."
Therby proving that you have no idea what you are talking about. In a majority of the States (26), you can most definitely be forced to join the union. *I* have been forced to join the Teamsters and the United Steel Workers for summer jobs. As in, "if you don't join, we can't employ you" (I asked). In addition, in many of the "right to work" states, even if one doesn't joing the union, one is still forced to PAY the union for their collective bargaining services.
Open your eyes a little - collective bargaining can be fine, and Unions can organize all they want - just don't pretend it's some panacea.
"It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."
Bwahahah - I haven't had a laugh like that in a long time.
"Quintuple the minimum wage". So everyone will make a minimum of $27.25. Cool. So what will a latte at Starbuck cost - $25? See, if you artificially set a floor for wages, ALL wages go up across the board, and so all costs of goods go up. The CEO will still make 500x what you do - it will just be measures in billions instead of millions.
As for unions, look in a mirror. In the 70's, the AFL-CIO decided to concentrate on lobbying in order to protect their position against changing economic conditions. This had some short term effect - the unions still have a power in Washington disproportionate to their representation. But they never figured out that no government mandate could replace organizing efforts, which they totally abandoned through the 70's and 80's. The unions gained their "75%" on their own - why did they feel the need for the Feds to help them keep it?
lying asshole promised reform and got in bed with the Democrats and got kicked out, which brough a HOFFA back in, for God's sake. I also was a member of the USW when I spend 8 hours a day shovelling sand in an iron foundry - the regulars there told me point blank to make sure I went back to school at the end of summer because they knew the job was a total dead end. I work with Union and non union craftsmen in the building trades, and I've even worked with sprinkler fitters that voted to disband their own union because the leadership sat on their asses, collected dues, and didn'y do a damned thing.
"And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."
Unions aren't evil - union officials are. And you (and I) voted them in. I did grow a brain - apparently, you've decided to stay a moron.
You are buying into the fallacy that the mental health profession did for many years - that all "problems" need solutions, with "problem" defined as "doesn't work the way an "expert" thinks it should work". The result was that you couldn't walk into a psychiatrists office and come out with a clean bill of health - ALL behaviors were symptoms.
Later, the definitions were changed to include the term "that interferes with everyday life" or something similar. So now, someone who double checks their door locks isn't OCD, just cautious, as long as they don't spend an hour a night doing it.
Likewise IPV6 - if the "problems" with IPV4 don't substantially affect the users, then they aren't problems. They may turn into problems in the future, when users start being affected, but they are not now. Saying "people just don't understand" isn't going to get a lot of traction - it insults the intelligence of the very audience one is trying to convince.
The problem with that reasoning is that EVERYONE thinks their application is critical. And the arbiters of who gets the priority access are not neutral - they want to give it to whoever pays the most. So...
Situation #1: providers oversell "priority access", leaving the "critical" applications fighting it out for bandwidth just like they do now (and the "non-critical" apps wishing they had their 56k back)
Situation #2: Providers ration "priority access", which keeps speeds high for "critical" applications but drives up the price of that access via the laws of supply and demand. Providers realize that therey have no incentive to use those higher profit margins to invest in better infrastructure, as the poorer the infrastructure, the more they can charge for "priority access". (Think Enron pulling plants offline to make electricity rates spike and California brownouts)
Situation #3: Government, quasi-gov't (ICAAN), or NGO control of access. Does ANYONE think this is a good idea?
Here's another thought - maybe telesurgery isn't that good an idea.
You misunderstand. I have no problem with a script that evolves away from the original roots - happens all the time, and sometimes for good reason (Ref. Blade Runner). But having gone so far afield, they should have cut the ties. As for geeks seeing it because of the book, maybe in the first weekend. After that, word of mouth pretty much trashed it among Asimov fans. That's why I stayed away.
Not quite. The US owes the Bourbons big time for using the Colonies as a proxy in their ongoing hostilities with the English branch of the Hanovers (Someone check my family names). However, shortly after that, the Bourbons were deposed, and the Republic took power.
And guess what - the Republic hasn't done Jack Shit for the US, or for anybody else, for the last 200 years. Sure, the US has gotten the rest of the world irritated at them lately, but France has a much longer history of pissing on the rest of the world and acting like they are doing them a favor.
Oh yeah - and in the past 200 years, the French haven't won a war on their own. Came close with Napoleon, but Britain took care of that. Got bailed out of WWI and WWII, and scooted out of Indochina. Military geniuses, they ain't.
Perhaps the reason the French are so scorned by the rest of the world is that they are so proud of their history with so very little reason.
Fine - then they should have done a global search and replace on the script, replacing all the original names and the title. It wouldn't have harmed the plot (such as it was), and would have avoided all the horrible word of mouth and increased their gross. How many people would have gone to see a robot shoot-em-up popcorn flick but stayed away because of the poor association with a different great story?
"There are a lot of excellent books out there - who wouldn't want to see a movie based on Niven's Ringworld series? Or Saberhagen's Berserker opera? - that would make fantastic movies."
Actually, after seeing what they did to the few Heinlein novels and "I, Robot", I'd rather not see any more of my favorites get trashed.
"Within a week of the Mint putting a plastic stripe in money, there were guys in bars demonstrating how to take said stripe back out."
Thereby making the bills suspect, and opening thgemselves up to charges of tampering/counterfeiting. Exactly what did they believe they were defeating? The point of the stripe isn't a tracking mechanism or some other tinfoil hat conspiracy, but an anti counterfeit measure - without the stripe, the bill is suspect and presumed counterfeit.
So the stripe can be removed - BFD. Show me the guys that can manufacture the stripes and print the money and insert the stripes - THAT would be impressive as a bar trick.
"They need to stop harassing people who can't hope to match their legal resources. This woman basically just kicked them in the nuts, hard. Good for her. Just like a good old fashioned kick in the nuts, you don't feel the 'real' pain immediately, for the benefit of those without nuts or experience in having them kicked."
Why am I picturing the RIAA lawyers all standing there with their hands over their nads while a diminutive lady dressed in black with asthma and a bouffant [sp?] eyeing them up?
Google gets to point to the DMCA takedown provision and say "Look - Congress passed this law with specifically this situation in mind, and we have followed the law." Although Google's libility may not be eliminated by the DMCA, it is a powerful arguement.
I think Viacom is suing for the same reason Google didn't come to an agreement - they both WANT to go to court. Viacom wants that provision of the DMCA struck down, and Google wants it upheld. The "Beeliion" dollars is the sign - it's just a random number to get them into the court room.
Slashdot Mirror
Castro blasted the US because that is what he does; without the US as a bogeyman he would have met Batista's fate long ago.
Which leads to an interesting question: if the US didn't exist, would Castro have to create it?
Whoa, there, big fella.
"DRM-free superior quality downloads across its entire digital repertoire"
The key word is "across", and that doesn't necessarily mean "all encompassing".
This is a legal tennis match that will go on for years - interminable, boring, but at the end there will be a winner. I'm just rooting for Google - on this one, I believe they have it right.
"Sorry, that is bull. There is no workplace neither in the US, nor in any other country where a union can force you to join. If you don't want to partake in collective bargaining, don't complain when your colleagues get a raise while you get nada."
Therby proving that you have no idea what you are talking about. In a majority of the States (26), you can most definitely be forced to join the union. *I* have been forced to join the Teamsters and the United Steel Workers for summer jobs. As in, "if you don't join, we can't employ you" (I asked). In addition, in many of the "right to work" states, even if one doesn't joing the union, one is still forced to PAY the union for their collective bargaining services.
Open your eyes a little - collective bargaining can be fine, and Unions can organize all they want - just don't pretend it's some panacea.
"It's time to quintuple the minimum wage, and then bring back the unions. Bullshit like Circut City never happened back when 75% of workers were unionized. Now that only 10% of us are in unions, they have us by the balls. And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."
Bwahahah - I haven't had a laugh like that in a long time.
"Quintuple the minimum wage". So everyone will make a minimum of $27.25. Cool. So what will a latte at Starbuck cost - $25? See, if you artificially set a floor for wages, ALL wages go up across the board, and so all costs of goods go up. The CEO will still make 500x what you do - it will just be measures in billions instead of millions.
As for unions, look in a mirror. In the 70's, the AFL-CIO decided to concentrate on lobbying in order to protect their position against changing economic conditions. This had some short term effect - the unions still have a power in Washington disproportionate to their representation. But they never figured out that no government mandate could replace organizing efforts, which they totally abandoned through the 70's and 80's. The unions gained their "75%" on their own - why did they feel the need for the Feds to help them keep it?
lying asshole promised reform and got in bed with the Democrats and got kicked out, which brough a HOFFA back in, for God's sake. I also was a member of the USW when I spend 8 hours a day shovelling sand in an iron foundry - the regulars there told me point blank to make sure I went back to school at the end of summer because they knew the job was a total dead end. I work with Union and non union craftsmen in the building trades, and I've even worked with sprinkler fitters that voted to disband their own union because the leadership sat on their asses, collected dues, and didn'y do a damned thing.
"And it's idiots like you who think it's the UNIONS that are evil that allow this bullshit to happen! Grow a fucking brain, moron."
Unions aren't evil - union officials are. And you (and I) voted them in. I did grow a brain - apparently, you've decided to stay a moron.
You are buying into the fallacy that the mental health profession did for many years - that all "problems" need solutions, with "problem" defined as "doesn't work the way an "expert" thinks it should work". The result was that you couldn't walk into a psychiatrists office and come out with a clean bill of health - ALL behaviors were symptoms.
Later, the definitions were changed to include the term "that interferes with everyday life" or something similar. So now, someone who double checks their door locks isn't OCD, just cautious, as long as they don't spend an hour a night doing it.
Likewise IPV6 - if the "problems" with IPV4 don't substantially affect the users, then they aren't problems. They may turn into problems in the future, when users start being affected, but they are not now. Saying "people just don't understand" isn't going to get a lot of traction - it insults the intelligence of the very audience one is trying to convince.
The problem with that reasoning is that EVERYONE thinks their application is critical. And the arbiters of who gets the priority access are not neutral - they want to give it to whoever pays the most. So...
Situation #1: providers oversell "priority access", leaving the "critical" applications fighting it out for bandwidth just like they do now (and the "non-critical" apps wishing they had their 56k back)
Situation #2: Providers ration "priority access", which keeps speeds high for "critical" applications but drives up the price of that access via the laws of supply and demand. Providers realize that therey have no incentive to use those higher profit margins to invest in better infrastructure, as the poorer the infrastructure, the more they can charge for "priority access". (Think Enron pulling plants offline to make electricity rates spike and California brownouts)
Situation #3: Government, quasi-gov't (ICAAN), or NGO control of access. Does ANYONE think this is a good idea?
Here's another thought - maybe telesurgery isn't that good an idea.
I'm thinking Niven's planetary Ramjet.
I gotta say, attaching "classic" to "blogonarcissism" - a word that, per the Urban Dictionary, "isn't defined yet", is either inspired or retarded.
Probably both.
"OMG I have to sequester myself at home with my dog and a shotgun"
Absolutely the wrong response - she should get a gun and carry it with her! That way, she can protect herself AND have a life.
Oh, wait - there are places where that is illegal. Well, I guess the police will protect her...
On second thought, get the shotgun and 2 dogs.
They could have John Cleese design it, but they'd wind up with an abbatoir instead.
Time-to-unit sales measured against a particular title? Why not measure cost of implementation versus FCOJ futures?
You misunderstand. I have no problem with a script that evolves away from the original roots - happens all the time, and sometimes for good reason (Ref. Blade Runner). But having gone so far afield, they should have cut the ties. As for geeks seeing it because of the book, maybe in the first weekend. After that, word of mouth pretty much trashed it among Asimov fans. That's why I stayed away.
Not quite. The US owes the Bourbons big time for using the Colonies as a proxy in their ongoing hostilities with the English branch of the Hanovers (Someone check my family names). However, shortly after that, the Bourbons were deposed, and the Republic took power.
And guess what - the Republic hasn't done Jack Shit for the US, or for anybody else, for the last 200 years. Sure, the US has gotten the rest of the world irritated at them lately, but France has a much longer history of pissing on the rest of the world and acting like they are doing them a favor.
Oh yeah - and in the past 200 years, the French haven't won a war on their own. Came close with Napoleon, but Britain took care of that. Got bailed out of WWI and WWII, and scooted out of Indochina. Military geniuses, they ain't.
Perhaps the reason the French are so scorned by the rest of the world is that they are so proud of their history with so very little reason.
Fine - then they should have done a global search and replace on the script, replacing all the original names and the title. It wouldn't have harmed the plot (such as it was), and would have avoided all the horrible word of mouth and increased their gross. How many people would have gone to see a robot shoot-em-up popcorn flick but stayed away because of the poor association with a different great story?
Less Nessman's part in the best TV episode ever were the phrases "They're dropping like bags of wet cement!" and "Oh, the Humanity!"
And yes, I know the last one was from the Hindenburg disaster, and I'm sure the writers did as well. That's why it's funny.
"There are a lot of excellent books out there - who wouldn't want to see a movie based on Niven's Ringworld series? Or Saberhagen's Berserker opera? - that would make fantastic movies."
Actually, after seeing what they did to the few Heinlein novels and "I, Robot", I'd rather not see any more of my favorites get trashed.
I like Vonage, but it sounds like this could kill them.
"they came in whores."
Wow. Just...wow.
"Within a week of the Mint putting a plastic stripe in money, there were guys in bars demonstrating how to take said stripe back out."
Thereby making the bills suspect, and opening thgemselves up to charges of tampering/counterfeiting. Exactly what did they believe they were defeating? The point of the stripe isn't a tracking mechanism or some other tinfoil hat conspiracy, but an anti counterfeit measure - without the stripe, the bill is suspect and presumed counterfeit.
So the stripe can be removed - BFD. Show me the guys that can manufacture the stripes and print the money and insert the stripes - THAT would be impressive as a bar trick.
"They need to stop harassing people who can't hope to match their legal resources. This woman basically just kicked them in the nuts, hard. Good for her. Just like a good old fashioned kick in the nuts, you don't feel the 'real' pain immediately, for the benefit of those without nuts or experience in having them kicked."
Why am I picturing the RIAA lawyers all standing there with their hands over their nads while a diminutive lady dressed in black with asthma and a bouffant [sp?] eyeing them up?
Best.Seuss.Book.Ever.
Yeah, Google is SOOOO stupid they didn't se this coming, when everyone and his retarded sister was publishing pieces on it.
Or
Google has a plan, and it's a feasible one, and you are just pissed off because you're not bright enough to figure it out, much less work at Google.
Google gets to point to the DMCA takedown provision and say "Look - Congress passed this law with specifically this situation in mind, and we have followed the law." Although Google's libility may not be eliminated by the DMCA, it is a powerful arguement.
I think Viacom is suing for the same reason Google didn't come to an agreement - they both WANT to go to court. Viacom wants that provision of the DMCA struck down, and Google wants it upheld. The "Beeliion" dollars is the sign - it's just a random number to get them into the court room.
I guess Larry Niven had it right.