It shouldn't be called the gig economy, it should be called the "I got mine" economy. I'm also partial to the "screw you" economy.
Isn't the "I got mine" economy want we ultimately want? The ultimate democratic/capitalist system where everyone can offer goods and services, not just those with licenses/permits/artificially restricted access?
Here's the problem with your logic. If you, me, and most other people are "unsure" he is in violation of some particular statute, there is a problem with the statute. Laws ought to be clear and obvious.
Firstly that is not logic.Your conclusion does not follow from you premise
Like Physics and Calculus, complex things are complex. There's no law of the universe that says things should be easy.
If we have to "guess", even having access to the statutes in question, then that is itself a problem.
We don't have to guess. As with any specialist trade we rely on people with training to make those decisions for us. And if we wish to question those decision we have processes in place to do so which require more rigour than just thinking out loud.
This is my big problem with media and most internet forums. They take snippets of info out of context then specifically drum up controversy based on that misinformation. We all need to be smarter than that.
Nice. You are aware that slavery was not unique to the US, right?
Yes, why do you ask? Is it to avoid answering my question? Or is to justify the the fact that the US was built mostly on slave labour and that even today in 2018 there are still no serious measures for reparations? Or in your mind we should forget all about it because someone else somewhere did it too?
Because that is what you are implying with your response, and it sounds pretty fucking crazy.
Yeah, a film in which four different cast members won acting awards, the writing won an award, the direction won an award, and the writing won a fucking Hugo back when it had credibility must have had really shit plot lines, scripts and acting.
As I said, different people have different tastes. I do not form my opinions based purely on award show judges...
I wonder what the impact of spam has been to Spam (The trademarked processed meat product). Would the company still be in business if its name wasn't mentioned millions of times a day because of something completely unrelated?
To think, of all those millions of federal employees, over all the years the US has been a nation, and here is the _very first_ one
Where did it say that?
The miscreant! The crook! Hang him! Destroy his career, burn his house, harass his family!
Or what actually happened was that a complaint was made because a law may have been broken and that was investigated with only a warning issued. But carry on with the Fox News narrative if that makes you feel better. Maintain the anger! We're always angry at everything!
Because when _some people_ lose the election,
Oh right, you're one of those people that treat politics as team sport and your team is the best one, and everything bad is the other team's fault. Good luck with that...
None of those stories are poorly produced or littered with cheap gimmicks.
But shrug, you seem to have a very narrow expectation from a science fiction film. Writing off something like Aliens because 'too shoot 'em up action fluff' is the most pretentious bollocks I've read for weeks.
Well we all have different tastes, and I'm particularly picky about a quality production and tight plot lines/scripts/acting etc, and the Academy members probably are too.
Of course real house wives and the kardashians arent soap operas.
Because you say they aren't? What is a soap opera but stupid contrived drama each week? That is exactly what the reality format is, the modern day soap. Whether it be American Idol, Survivor, Real Housewives or The Bachelor the formula is identical across the board to the classic soap opera. Characters who love each other one minute and hate each other the next, or some contrived reason that something has to happen to create tension when there doesn't need to be, lots of bickering and tears and shocked expressions etc
If you can't see that then you are probably in the target market.
Alien was ok, but more a horror than anything else. Every other alien was too shoot 'em up action fluff
Terminator and Terminator 2.
As above. The first was ok, second was just an action flick
Children of Men.
We're talking Academy Award quality right? Children of Men was again, ok for an action/sci-fi, but it's still far too fluffy and some of the script and acting was flaky
Brazil.
Haven't seen it
Gattaca
Good film
Donnie Darko.
One of my favourites, but not exactly sci-fi out side of the parallel time travel thing. And Drew Barrymore's acting was appalling.
The Fountain.
I thought this was stupid. It almost bordered on brilliant but didn't quite click at the places it should've.
The Fifth Element.
Good but it's comic book action fluff
Twelve Monkeys.
Good but not good enough
Dark City.
Good but not good enough
Never Let Me Go.
Equilibrium.
Haven't seen it
The Butterfly Effect.
I thought this was stupid
Ex Machina.
Haven't seen it
Maybe I've just seen more films.
You missed The Andromeda Strain which is probably one of the best Sci-fi film of all time.
As I said I like Sci-fi the most, but the genre is littered with great stories that are poorly produced or littered with cheap gimmicks that ruin them (eg I Robot). Academy award level films need to be relatable to everyone and Sci-fi is rarely that. Robot and Frank is probably as close as I can think of right now.
I've never had a female friend or dated some one who watched soaps.
But someone is watching them, you accept that right?
Prime material does not recieve a 1pm weekday time slot.
Depends on your definition of Soap Opera. Dallas and Dynasty we're very popular prime time soaps in their day. Then there was the Beverly Hills 90210, Melrose Place hits, now it's Kardashians or Real Housewives. This genre has been going as long as TV so someone is watching it.
if lady's (just over 50% of the population) were all about soap operas they'd have a better time slot.
See above re Kardashians and their many, many clones. Also remember that the most popular shows still only get a few million viewers which is ~1% of the population. TV shows are about capturing a market segment for advertising. Soap Operas are one of the most effective at that for the female audience.
Just fucking teach the class without a stupid assed gimmick that changes every couple years.
My wife is a teacher (not in US) of 20 years and that is her main complaint. Some know-it-all at the Dept thinks they have a new way of doing things so forces change across the whole system. Then a few election cycles later the latest know-it-all changes it all over again.
Watch the segment on Michael Moore's 'Where to Invade Next' on Finland. It pretty much sums up the problems with our schools.
I think the issue is that most Sci-Fi is absolute trash. It's my favourite genre, but just about every movie has some gaping plot hole or poorly thought out MacGuffin that makes it unworthy of any credibility. Outside of 2001 and Blade Runner, I'm struggling to think of a Sci-Fi film I'd even consider worthy. Interstellar maybe?
You're citing soap operas and garbage like that youtube clip as "female fan service"?
I feel like the case you're making here is the opposite of what was intended.
Why not? Just because your favourite mode of entertainment is a feature film doesn't mean that is the chosen mode for others.
Men have hunter origins, ie go out do something, come back with reward. Women have social origins, stay in, interact, be rewarded. So it may just be that TV is their preference.
Note: I'm not claiming one way or the other, but the idea that just because you don't like something shouldn't rule out the possibility that other people do. Which I think is the GP's point
Spoken like someone with little knowledge of real history.
The no true Scotsmen fallacy. Good work...
Spend more time in history and world political science and learn more about what has happened in the world in the last 70 years. Then come back and try again.
Well you showed me with that indepth analysis. Here let me show you how it works:
America invaded Korea. Result: still going 70 years later
America invaded Vietnam. Result they lost but nothing bad actually happened so proved the whole adventure was a complete waste of time, money and lives.
America invaded Iraq. Result: Never actually thought past what happens after you start a war, still going, now turned escalated into Syria and involving Russia, possibly creating a second cold war which could have impacts for decades to come. Pure genius.
America invaded Afghanistan. Result still going after 15 years for no reason costing many lives and money.
Which part of that don't you agree with? I won't expect a logical response, we know how your type works.
Truth. Don't get me wrong, just because I talk demilitarization I'm not blind to realities that we live in. There are evil shits in places of power in the world and sometimes the only thing that holds them back is some one with a bigger stick. It is a sad state of affairs but it is the world we were born into.
Those evil shits are you. Think about it, the biggest security issue today is Islamic fundamentalism created by the pro-stick mentality in the US
We need military, but a smart, useful military not a big dumb one that starts wars they haven't thought about how to finish (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq - not many successes there).
I agree. What you want requires leadership. If a president tried to go to the people to de-militarize you would see all number of atrocities flare on this planet---starting with his/her assassination. I would love to demilitarize but it is a revolutionary change unfortunately and a lot of people would die for peace.
You don't need to demilitarise, just don't treat military spending like oxygen. The US could divert 10% of their military spend to education and it would double their budget. The end result is a stronger country, so it is effective a defence spend as well.
They don't say it directly. It comes from constantly promoting office jobs as the thing to aim for while ignoring and marginalizing trades.
Is that what one person said to you once and so you extrapolated that across the tens of thousands teachers across the country? Interesting technique....
I know it's not popular to call people out for that, we're supposed to be nice and respect their free speech
Not respecting free speech is free speech so it's ok. It's one of those things like intolerance. You can never complain about it because doing so makes you guilty of it.
Ok so I read some more, and this FISA court is run by 11 judges only one of which was appointed under the current POTUS. It's hard to see their judgments have any connection to him positive or negative.
Just not being dependent on someone else for energy has so many plusses it's even worth it if it costs more. And with green energy you get a much better environment as an extra! It really has almost only plusses.
Except the handful of rich old white dudes in power have vested interests in fossil fuels so all those pluses count for nothing. How's that swamp draining going?
Slashdot Mirror
It shouldn't be called the gig economy, it should be called the "I got mine" economy. I'm also partial to the "screw you" economy.
Isn't the "I got mine" economy want we ultimately want? The ultimate democratic/capitalist system where everyone can offer goods and services, not just those with licenses/permits/artificially restricted access?
There is _Zero_ positive social or economic gain from rent control. It all contributes to city cancer.
The short answer is that you can't beat the law of supply and demand...
Here's the problem with your logic. If you, me, and most other people are "unsure" he is in violation of some particular statute, there is a problem with the statute. Laws ought to be clear and obvious.
Firstly that is not logic.Your conclusion does not follow from you premise
Like Physics and Calculus, complex things are complex. There's no law of the universe that says things should be easy.
If we have to "guess", even having access to the statutes in question, then that is itself a problem.
We don't have to guess. As with any specialist trade we rely on people with training to make those decisions for us. And if we wish to question those decision we have processes in place to do so which require more rigour than just thinking out loud.
This is my big problem with media and most internet forums. They take snippets of info out of context then specifically drum up controversy based on that misinformation. We all need to be smarter than that.
Nice. You are aware that slavery was not unique to the US, right?
Yes, why do you ask?
Is it to avoid answering my question? Or is to justify the the fact that the US was built mostly on slave labour and that even today in 2018 there are still no serious measures for reparations? Or in your mind we should forget all about it because someone else somewhere did it too?
Because that is what you are implying with your response, and it sounds pretty fucking crazy.
Yeah, a film in which four different cast members won acting awards, the writing won an award, the direction won an award, and the writing won a fucking Hugo back when it had credibility must have had really shit plot lines, scripts and acting.
As I said, different people have different tastes. I do not form my opinions based purely on award show judges...
I wonder what the impact of spam has been to Spam (The trademarked processed meat product). Would the company still be in business if its name wasn't mentioned millions of times a day because of something completely unrelated?
Who had the production capacity that the US had prior to the war???
Before or after they had slaves?
To think, of all those millions of federal employees, over all the years the US has been a nation, and here is the _very first_ one
Where did it say that?
The miscreant! The crook! Hang him! Destroy his career, burn his house, harass his family!
Or what actually happened was that a complaint was made because a law may have been broken and that was investigated with only a warning issued. But carry on with the Fox News narrative if that makes you feel better. Maintain the anger! We're always angry at everything!
Because when _some people_ lose the election,
Oh right, you're one of those people that treat politics as team sport and your team is the best one, and everything bad is the other team's fault. Good luck with that...
I'm not at all sure that he's in violation.
This is why we have courts, so that you, me, CNN, or Fox News don't have to guess...
None of those stories are poorly produced or littered with cheap gimmicks.
But shrug, you seem to have a very narrow expectation from a science fiction film. Writing off something like Aliens because 'too shoot 'em up action fluff' is the most pretentious bollocks I've read for weeks.
Well we all have different tastes, and I'm particularly picky about a quality production and tight plot lines/scripts/acting etc, and the Academy members probably are too.
Of course real house wives and the kardashians arent soap operas.
Because you say they aren't? What is a soap opera but stupid contrived drama each week? That is exactly what the reality format is, the modern day soap. Whether it be American Idol, Survivor, Real Housewives or The Bachelor the formula is identical across the board to the classic soap opera. Characters who love each other one minute and hate each other the next, or some contrived reason that something has to happen to create tension when there doesn't need to be, lots of bickering and tears and shocked expressions etc
If you can't see that then you are probably in the target market.
Moon.
Haven't seen it.
Alien and Aliens.
Alien was ok, but more a horror than anything else. Every other alien was too shoot 'em up action fluff
Terminator and Terminator 2.
As above. The first was ok, second was just an action flick
Children of Men.
We're talking Academy Award quality right? Children of Men was again, ok for an action/sci-fi, but it's still far too fluffy and some of the script and acting was flaky
Brazil.
Haven't seen it
Gattaca
Good film
Donnie Darko.
One of my favourites, but not exactly sci-fi out side of the parallel time travel thing. And Drew Barrymore's acting was appalling.
The Fountain.
I thought this was stupid. It almost bordered on brilliant but didn't quite click at the places it should've.
The Fifth Element.
Good but it's comic book action fluff
Twelve Monkeys.
Good but not good enough
Dark City.
Good but not good enough Never Let Me Go.
Equilibrium.
Haven't seen it
The Butterfly Effect.
I thought this was stupid
Ex Machina.
Haven't seen it
Maybe I've just seen more films.
You missed The Andromeda Strain which is probably one of the best Sci-fi film of all time.
As I said I like Sci-fi the most, but the genre is littered with great stories that are poorly produced or littered with cheap gimmicks that ruin them (eg I Robot). Academy award level films need to be relatable to everyone and Sci-fi is rarely that. Robot and Frank is probably as close as I can think of right now.
The first version of Dune is excellent, in my opinion..
I enjoyed the original Dune, but mainly because it was original in an alternative non-Hollywood way. ie exactly the anti-academy award style of film.
I've never had a female friend or dated some one who watched soaps.
But someone is watching them, you accept that right?
Prime material does not recieve a 1pm weekday time slot.
Depends on your definition of Soap Opera. Dallas and Dynasty we're very popular prime time soaps in their day. Then there was the Beverly Hills 90210, Melrose Place hits, now it's Kardashians or Real Housewives. This genre has been going as long as TV so someone is watching it.
if lady's (just over 50% of the population) were all about soap operas they'd have a better time slot.
See above re Kardashians and their many, many clones. Also remember that the most popular shows still only get a few million viewers which is ~1% of the population. TV shows are about capturing a market segment for advertising. Soap Operas are one of the most effective at that for the female audience.
Just fucking teach the class without a stupid assed gimmick that changes every couple years.
My wife is a teacher (not in US) of 20 years and that is her main complaint. Some know-it-all at the Dept thinks they have a new way of doing things so forces change across the whole system. Then a few election cycles later the latest know-it-all changes it all over again.
Watch the segment on Michael Moore's 'Where to Invade Next' on Finland. It pretty much sums up the problems with our schools.
I think the issue is that most Sci-Fi is absolute trash. It's my favourite genre, but just about every movie has some gaping plot hole or poorly thought out MacGuffin that makes it unworthy of any credibility. Outside of 2001 and Blade Runner, I'm struggling to think of a Sci-Fi film I'd even consider worthy. Interstellar maybe?
You're citing soap operas and garbage like that youtube clip as "female fan service"?
I feel like the case you're making here is the opposite of what was intended.
Why not? Just because your favourite mode of entertainment is a feature film doesn't mean that is the chosen mode for others.
Men have hunter origins, ie go out do something, come back with reward. Women have social origins, stay in, interact, be rewarded. So it may just be that TV is their preference.
Note: I'm not claiming one way or the other, but the idea that just because you don't like something shouldn't rule out the possibility that other people do. Which I think is the GP's point
+1
Spoken like someone with little knowledge of real history.
The no true Scotsmen fallacy. Good work...
Spend more time in history and world political science and learn more about what has happened in the world in the last 70 years. Then come back and try again.
Well you showed me with that indepth analysis. Here let me show you how it works:
America invaded Korea. Result: still going 70 years later
America invaded Vietnam. Result they lost but nothing bad actually happened so proved the whole adventure was a complete waste of time, money and lives.
America invaded Iraq. Result: Never actually thought past what happens after you start a war, still going, now turned escalated into Syria and involving Russia, possibly creating a second cold war which could have impacts for decades to come. Pure genius.
America invaded Afghanistan. Result still going after 15 years for no reason costing many lives and money.
Which part of that don't you agree with? I won't expect a logical response, we know how your type works.
Truth. Don't get me wrong, just because I talk demilitarization I'm not blind to realities that we live in. There are evil shits in places of power in the world and sometimes the only thing that holds them back is some one with a bigger stick. It is a sad state of affairs but it is the world we were born into.
Those evil shits are you. Think about it, the biggest security issue today is Islamic fundamentalism created by the pro-stick mentality in the US We need military, but a smart, useful military not a big dumb one that starts wars they haven't thought about how to finish (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq - not many successes there).
I agree. What you want requires leadership. If a president tried to go to the people to de-militarize you would see all number of atrocities flare on this planet---starting with his/her assassination. I would love to demilitarize but it is a revolutionary change unfortunately and a lot of people would die for peace.
You don't need to demilitarise, just don't treat military spending like oxygen. The US could divert 10% of their military spend to education and it would double their budget. The end result is a stronger country, so it is effective a defence spend as well.
They don't say it directly. It comes from constantly promoting office jobs as the thing to aim for while ignoring and marginalizing trades.
Is that what one person said to you once and so you extrapolated that across the tens of thousands teachers across the country? Interesting technique....
I know it's not popular to call people out for that, we're supposed to be nice and respect their free speech
Not respecting free speech is free speech so it's ok. It's one of those things like intolerance. You can never complain about it because doing so makes you guilty of it.
Ok so I read some more, and this FISA court is run by 11 judges only one of which was appointed under the current POTUS. It's hard to see their judgments have any connection to him positive or negative.
Just not being dependent on someone else for energy has so many plusses it's even worth it if it costs more. And with green energy you get a much better environment as an extra! It really has almost only plusses.
Except the handful of rich old white dudes in power have vested interests in fossil fuels so all those pluses count for nothing. How's that swamp draining going?