"Has anyone else taken notice to how this whole 'Green' thing is really bent around 'anti-capitalism'?"
Yes, definitly and the Green movement also has some strong parallels with religion.
1. They induce guilt to control.
2. They want to protect things simply because of sacred-like reasons (see the book "Leave no Footprints" to know what I am talking about).
3. If we don't believe their ideas, they try to make us prove a negative knowing full well that noone can prove a negative (proving that something is perfectly safe is as futile as proving that god exists).
According to the Wayback machine, Ebay was indexed in 1997, but if you go to the page in question, it shows a copyright notice of 1995-1996. http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ebay.com
Assuming the other guy documented the idea one year before he filed the application, it's pretty close. Somebody else has got to have prior art before 95-94?
I will breed. I am not responsible for the behavior of others. When parents will bear the true cost of bearing their own children, they will be more careful.
In France, mass breeding halted as soon as the inheritance law was changed. The new law required all possessions to be equally distributed between surviving offsprings. Apparently, this change in the law changed the power structure in the family and parents didn't want to have that many kids anymore. And while this may not be an example of bearing the true cost of having children, it just goes to show you that people can modify their breeding behavior if it's in their economic interest to do so.
"Look at Macromedia. People download and crack trials of their software. They learn how to use it. When they get into corporate environments, they have users who will put it to good use and put it on a corporate expense account. "
The CEO of Macromedia was actually bragging about this a few years ago. Nowadays, the company needs more cash than marketshare, and I guarantee that you won't be able to find the cracks of the more recent MX versions.
For the people interested in the pre-MX versions, my advice is to google the cracks of those versions, and then buy used books that still contain the version of the pre-MX trial software.
The production cost for making episode 2 and episode 3 was over 500 million dollars. But your point is still valid, I'm sure they will recoup their losses.
Personally, I believe that _only_ certain segments of our society will collapse under that weight. Hopefully, my descendants and I will be in the segment that survives.
Using some of its significant cash reserves to wipe out a large chunk of Third-World debt - now that would be real charity.
No, it wouldn't "be real charity". Wiping out the debt of Third World countries would help the corrupt government and the corrupt elite of those countries. It wouldn't go to the people who need it the most.
In one of the technology museum of London (I don't remember its name). I remember a similar effect being demonstrated. Only, it was a sand bin with compressed air coming from the bottom. When one pushed the button, the sand became very fluid and I could easily sink my hands in it. It was sort of a quick-sand on demand. The effect was pretty neat.
I wonder if someone could replicate the same effect on a larger scale in their garden?
She has found my hidden porn archives twice already, and I could see her growing skepticism.
There is no point in hiding things from girlfriends. You will hide it. They will find it. That's just the way they are.
The first time you left your girl home, she looked in your closet, she went through your stuff, and she pressed the redial button on your phone. A few months into the relationship, she will have found everything.
Hiding and denying things is only giving her the power to manipulate you. Hopefully, your response was "Yes, you found porn. So what? There is nothing wrong with porn".
"Just when did SCO become the North Korea of IT? "
In the case of North Korea, they actually had a treaty from the US promising that we would end their economic sanctions and build them two light-water nuclear power plants in exchange for their agreement to stop their nuclear program.
If you want to compare SCO to anyone, compare them to the United States.
No, it won't be good for either you or the economy. This is the broken window fallacy which says that somebody going around throwing rocks through windows helps the economy by increasing the business of window repairmen. The flaw is that it ignores that the money spent on repairs would otherwise have been put to more productive uses.
Did you mean "yes, it won't be good for either you or the economy..."? Because I am agreeing with you -- I was pointing out the obvious fallacy in the original argument for welfare. The state of the economy, as it is measured and reported by our corporate media, is fallacious. And the state of the economy, as it argued and measured by the earlier poster and most democrats, is fallacious. "The flaw that it ignores", as you said, is not only present in my example, but it is also present in the earlier post arguing that welfare will improve the economy.
I am a foreigner who didn't graduate from college and who's not quite there yet in terms of income.
But in any case, I'm sure this won't stop you from finding other insults and other stereotypes to pigeonhole me into.
Better yet, ask your employer, and if the explanation is sensible enough -- cross out the paragraph in question, write down what your employer said instead, and ask your HR bunny to initial the change.
I did this to a used car salesman once and he quickly rescinded what he said.
I was merely pointing the flaw in your argument.
I still maintain that our society doesn't necessarily benefit from what our economy benefits from.
In any case, please spare me your anarchy vs. civilization speech. "Civilized societies" can destroy property as much as anarchists can. They just do it for the so-called good of the economy.
You chose to have a wife not work. You chose to have four kids. You chose to have a car that needed car payments. You chose not to buy appreciable assets such as an apartment or a house. And you chose not to leave below your means.
Those were all choices. You didn't need to have kids right away. You didn't need to have your wife stay at home right from day one. And you didn't need to pay for a car that cost more than $2,500.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is goatse relevant? Is someone actually claiming copyownership of that picture?
No, that slashdoter wouldn't stand a chance. Anyone honest enough to go to jury duty is too honest to lie.
Yes, definitly and the Green movement also has some strong parallels with religion.
1. They induce guilt to control.
2. They want to protect things simply because of sacred-like reasons (see the book "Leave no Footprints" to know what I am talking about).
3. If we don't believe their ideas, they try to make us prove a negative knowing full well that noone can prove a negative (proving that something is perfectly safe is as futile as proving that god exists).
Assuming the other guy documented the idea one year before he filed the application, it's pretty close. Somebody else has got to have prior art before 95-94?
...that's what you get for ignoring your jury duty summons.
In France, mass breeding halted as soon as the inheritance law was changed. The new law required all possessions to be equally distributed between surviving offsprings. Apparently, this change in the law changed the power structure in the family and parents didn't want to have that many kids anymore. And while this may not be an example of bearing the true cost of having children, it just goes to show you that people can modify their breeding behavior if it's in their economic interest to do so.
Cutsie little turtles? Yes, we need more cute animals -- all the other animals can go.
Yep, that's pretty cool. I made the connection only recently when I was browsing the WikiWeb. I wish I had known the connection before.
The CEO of Macromedia was actually bragging about this a few years ago. Nowadays, the company needs more cash than marketshare, and I guarantee that you won't be able to find the cracks of the more recent MX versions.
For the people interested in the pre-MX versions, my advice is to google the cracks of those versions, and then buy used books that still contain the version of the pre-MX trial software.
The production cost for making episode 2 and episode 3 was over 500 million dollars. But your point is still valid, I'm sure they will recoup their losses.
Personally, I believe that _only_ certain segments of our society will collapse under that weight. Hopefully, my descendants and I will be in the segment that survives.
No, it wouldn't "be real charity". Wiping out the debt of Third World countries would help the corrupt government and the corrupt elite of those countries. It wouldn't go to the people who need it the most.
SCO gives away 2 billion dollars worth of software.
...everybody knows the boats disappear in the bermuda triangle because of David Copperfield.
I wonder if someone could replicate the same effect on a larger scale in their garden?
There is no point in hiding things from girlfriends. You will hide it. They will find it. That's just the way they are. The first time you left your girl home, she looked in your closet, she went through your stuff, and she pressed the redial button on your phone. A few months into the relationship, she will have found everything.
Hiding and denying things is only giving her the power to manipulate you. Hopefully, your response was "Yes, you found porn. So what? There is nothing wrong with porn".
Spamming the legal system seems to be profitable.
In the case of North Korea, they actually had a treaty from the US promising that we would end their economic sanctions and build them two light-water nuclear power plants in exchange for their agreement to stop their nuclear program.
If you want to compare SCO to anyone, compare them to the United States.
Did you mean "yes, it won't be good for either you or the economy..."? Because I am agreeing with you -- I was pointing out the obvious fallacy in the original argument for welfare. The state of the economy, as it is measured and reported by our corporate media, is fallacious. And the state of the economy, as it argued and measured by the earlier poster and most democrats, is fallacious. "The flaw that it ignores", as you said, is not only present in my example, but it is also present in the earlier post arguing that welfare will improve the economy.
I am a foreigner who didn't graduate from college and who's not quite there yet in terms of income. But in any case, I'm sure this won't stop you from finding other insults and other stereotypes to pigeonhole me into.
In any case, barter is taxable according to the IRS, so I expect all the problems you would have with money.
How can I check if I have a silver coin?
I did this to a used car salesman once and he quickly rescinded what he said.
In any case, please spare me your anarchy vs. civilization speech. "Civilized societies" can destroy property as much as anarchists can. They just do it for the so-called good of the economy.
You chose to have a wife not work. You chose to have four kids. You chose to have a car that needed car payments. You chose not to buy appreciable assets such as an apartment or a house. And you chose not to leave below your means.
Those were all choices. You didn't need to have kids right away. You didn't need to have your wife stay at home right from day one. And you didn't need to pay for a car that cost more than $2,500.