I'm sorry but this is just bad analysis. Stacey Quandt will sooner be one of the unemployed dot-commers than Microsoft will lose it's monopoly.
First thing, people don't just up and sell their computers for no reason and fewer still change the OS on the system they already exist. Everyone I know is perfectly content with what they have right now and have no plans to upgrade. Second, even if they did want to upgrade, common sense tells them not too since they can do what they want with what they have and the extra cash is better spent elsewhere.
The life cycle of computers is increasing. I've had a DP 450 mac for 4 and a half years or so. It still runs like a champ and I have no reason thusfar to upgrade. My next machine may last me 5 years too. So how does Stacey Quandt expect Linux to overtake windows in 3 years when people are spending a lot more time with what they have now?
No, my guess is Stacey Quandt will be out of a job in 3 months. 3 years from now Stacey Quandt will be saying "Damn, I wish I had actually done my job rather than spouting propoganda. Maybe I'd still be making big bucks rather than changing cum stained bed sheets down at the Mobil 6 for a living". Analysis like this bring back the "OMFG THE NEXT BILLION DOLLAR IPO" days.
You have to meet safety standards, certified testing, crash testing, emissions etc etc etc. You can license a kit car but not one you engineer yourself.
Actually, no you can't. Safety laws still apply. This does however vary from state to state. Dynamite is illegal to explode on public and private land for example. Just because you own it doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it. I disagree with this analysis but it's the current interpretation of the law.
Kitcars are engineered buy a manufacturer. Putting something together from a licensed manufacturer isn't the same engineering and rolling your own. You are comparing apples and oranges.
Yes but designing your own OS from scratch does not give you the right to install it on Apples hardware for instance. Nor do you have the right to demand that you be able to install it. You bought an apple box, designed to run apple software. If you designed the OS then make the hardware to and you have all the rights you please.
He is very reasonable and debates with him are always productive. He's also not out to invade peoples homes to find pirate movies and songs, though many of the people who side with him are.
This was a great interview from what I read. I do think he skipped around the question of whether it was wrong to write a six line program to allow yourself to watch a movie.
Valenti does make a good point however. Building your own doesn't count. Try building your own car, not one from other auto makers parts. Make one from scratch using parts you engineered. Then try to get it licenced and street legal. It'll never happen. The same goes for movies. If you don't want to buy the products the industry puts out for watching the media then you don't get to watch the media. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
Where did I say I was Christian? I went to a Christian school 20 years ago. If calling someone a douchebag is what a reject like you calls tolerance then yes, I am a very tolerant person. I love how people like you jump to conclusions make the most pathetic assumptions and wrap it all up in your own ignorant sense of supieriority. What are you, like 12 years old?
"Dude, that makes no sense whatsoever. Tolerant people should tolerate intolerant people. Ain't that what it's all about? Allowing other belief systems not in agreement with your own to exist alongside yours peacefully?"
You don't tolerate crusaders, people who want to convert you, even if it means killing you to do it. That's what Christians are.
"Awesome. Ever read it for yourself? Oh wait, no"
Oh wait, yes. I spent 7 years in Christian private school. Thanks for playing, come again, NOT. You are a prime example of what I was talking about.
"Awesome. Would you like to prove it for me now using your choice of scientific papers?"
Would my 2nd grade text books suffice or do you need something with more pictures?
"How about that for respect and tolerance. "nyah nyah you suck" doesn't get anyone anywhere."
Yet thats exactly what you yourself are doing. Brilliant. Care to dig the hole a little deeper?
"You SHOULD not buy into it. You SHOULD give it scrutiny. But from your post, you haven't shown any evidence that you've looked at things for yourself."
You are making inferals on your own assumptions. You should quit while you're behind.
There is no tolerating intolerance. The bible and Christianity as a whole is the most intolerant system of beliefs in history. It's also been proven repeatedly over centuries to be B.S. yet idiots and morons still flock to it like the little lost sheep that they are. Excuse the rest of us for not buying into it and giving it the scrutiny it so rightly deserves.
It doesn't work on mobile right now so your spinning your wheels arguing against it. Some phones and some locations may work, but the vast majority does not.
You can also drop the condescending attitude. You aren't holier than thou.
As for the emergency calls, that's rather easy. Just have an encrypted "address card" sent upon connection. If not encrypted then at least signed. This can all be done rather transparently. Of course, what are the chances of that actually working? I'd say slim to none.
On one level, your 24 and prone to these feelings. I've been there, done that.
On another level. Shut up. Suck it up and be a man. Do you have any idea how many people would kill to be in your shoes right now? I lost my job in IT and now work at a damn grocery store. My bills are killing me when 2 of my old pay checks would put me back in the red. I have to listen to people like you whine all day long "waaaaah my feet hurt, my back hurts, my but hurts, so and so said this and that about me". If you can't hack it then work at McDonalds making waaah burgers and french cries.
I work with a guy that's missing an eye because a bungie cord hit him while undoing it. He's got 2 damaged disks in his back and walks with a limp. Yet everyday, he wakes up, gets to work and lifts boxes, stocks shelves and never once complains about somethng as petty as stress. He has responsibilities and comes from a generation that did what they had to do to survive, they didn't grow up like a bunch of pampered prima donas with cell phones and lattes.
Get over it. The first part to getting over it, is to quite your whinning.
"doesn't necessarily mean that there's been an outbreak of mass stupidity."
I never said there was, just a lack of forward thinking. Music is now easier than ever to take with you, once people catch on I have a feeling they will look at their tiny little players and say "oops". This could create some animosity towards the companies selling them, especially when they price them so close to the larger capacity players.
I just think that the jury is still out, the technology is still too new and people have yet to be educated as to the differences.
When your entire CD collection gets compacted into a component smaller than a deck of cards then yes, it's all or nothing. As opposed to running home and reconnecting and manually transfering a select few tracks every time you want a change. "God forbid" manufacturers look ahead rather than behind let alone add convienience for the consumers.
"I" am "them" as is my father, my mother and every I know who refuses to buy HDTV until everyone else has it. YOU are assuming this "study" is correct, unbiased and even somewhat logical.
People don't buy cars that get 55 miles to the gallon but only have 1 gallon of fuel storage. They buy cars that get 15 miles to the gallon and have 30 gallons of storage.
All this study shows is that people are still utterly clueless about technology, what the terminology is and what will be possible six months from now. Period.
The average joe doesn't get rid of music they no longer listen to. It will just sit there. Take my dad for example, he has 100's of CD's and he listens to the radio in his truck. He loves iTunes and may get an iPod and when he does all that music will be going in. We're talking about a guy that stores everything in C:\ and NEVER makes subfolders. That's your average user. They won't bother making playlists and selecting a song here and there to transfer. They want it all there so when they feel like listening to it they can.
Typical thinking in the "here and now". They have 1000 songs now, but what about later? These guys don't think once consumers see how easy it is that their music collection will grow?
I would not buy a device that holds 1000 songs if I only owned 999. I would buy one that holds thousands because I wouldn't want my device being obsolete in a year or less.
I own a 15 gig 3g iPod and it's almost full. I'm hardly a power user either, I just collected a shat load of CD's since childhood.
Re:Why does everyone alwasy gotta knock sendmail??
on
Postfix 2.1 Released
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
If by religious you mean common sense discussion then sure. There is literally ZERO reason to use sendmail now. There is nothing you can do with sendmail that can't be done with Postfix or qmail and you'll get better performance and security to boot.
Technology like everything else has a life span. Sendmails ended long ago, get over it.
Re:Why does everyone alwasy gotta knock sendmail??
on
Postfix 2.1 Released
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Because of the design flaws in it and the fact that muh better MTA's now exist yet many people, some like you, refuse to migrate for the betterment of the internet.
My preference is qmail, only because I haven't used postfix in a production environment yet.
"You're assuming that the majority of consumers are ALWAYS intelligent enough that when faced with a micro-decision (eg. what soap to buy) with large scale implications (eg. what ecosystem that soap will destroy) that they'll always make the correct decision for themselves and everyone else. That's simply not true particularly when it benefits large corporations to twist the truth to suit themselves."
People make mistakes, no number of checks and balances, no intervention on anyones part will every change that. Making something idiot proof just creates more innovative idiots. Look at Apple, their OS is almost idiot proof yet still, someone every day everywhere manages to screw it up. I just prefer to lay my faith in my fellow man than my fellow mans system. Afterall, almost anything that can be done can be undone, with the exception of death and dismemberment. But then again, that's what insurance policies are for. j/k
"You're right. If you consider democrasy a failure, then you'll consider every system a failure. Capitalism and democrasy have lasted longest and worked best. That's because rewarding individual/group effort and empowering individuals works. We agree on this point."
Every system does fail. "Everything that has a beginning has an end". That's isn't from the Matrix, it's a Buddhist doctrine of impermances and it applies to everything, including socio-economic systems. The advantage to capitalism/democracy/republics is that within the system lies the tools to "undo" mistakes. In these systems revolution is possible without bloodshed, although bloodshed is also an option.
"What we don't agree on is whether or not government intervention has a part to play. Leaving it to market forces is like expecting a car to work without a driver. What we also don't agree on is whether or not a balanced budget equals a balanced approach to everything else. Money is an abstract concept of our own making and we need to make sure it represents value in real terms rather than letting the abstract concept have a life of its own."
Money is a symbol of value. Money takes lots of forms, the accounting term is "asset". My car is an asset, house too. This is of course getting more broad than I suspect is needed to make my point. Obviously government has a role to play, in OUR system. So long as Uncle Sam is taxing me he will have some influence, however large or small, on OUR economy. Our entire corporate structure is modeled to accomodate the tax system.
I think our disagreement lies in my speaking too broadly about the way things "should be" and not "the way they are" so to speak. For that I apologize but state that I think we have more in common than we perhaps realize.
Well, I don't usually reply to trolls that begin or end their replies with insults. I will however bite.
You forgot a simple thing called supply and demand in your ever so well thought out pseudo intellectual analysis. You're lack of understanding on the subject is astounding and your over simplification remarkably ignorant. I wont even get into your pathetic presumptions.
Oh and for the record I am libertarian, that's lp.org for your information and education. Now piss off troll. Expect no other replies from me.
That isn't the half of it. If the minimum wage increased at the same pace CEO wages did, it would be over 22$ an hour right now. Considering the "productivity" of our economy has gone up, and those who are the "producers" are making minimum or near minimum wages, I see it as inherantly unjust that they are the ones being shafted.
It's not about loyalty. Employment is a contract between employee and employer. Neither needs to sign if they don't wish to, and nothing is owed that isn't in said contract.
The companies inflate prices, they inflate wages to higher the best talent and as a result the cost of living also increases. To maintain living in a particular area wages must go up, period. Employees were not at fault for this.
What is happening now, is employers have been over the course of 3-4 years been demanding more productivity. This means people doing MORE work than they used to at the same or less pay. The cost of living has not lowered in most areas, it's gone up. This means, that now that jobs are coming back people are job hopping because their employers squeezed them as hard as possible with threats of ending their contracts and sending them to the unemployment line. Why stay at a company that had you doing the work of 5 of your ex-coworkers when you can now leave and get paid the same or more and do less?
It's a vicous circle and is why we are always focused on GROWTH. The bubble that burst was a growing pain. They have existed as long as economies have and will continue to exist long into the future.
"My argument is that the chief responsibility should be to no small group but society as a whole. Not the shareholders. Not the consumers. If you just aim to satisfy either group you can always cut corners and make more money by screwing up the environment, or other parties not directly involved."
That's called cutting off the nose to spite the face. Society is slang for "Majority". A majority will always vote itself special priveldges. That is why pure democracy has failed everywhere it's been tried. It is also why this nation is a republic instead.
A consumer focus is the only option as people can vote with their dollars. If society really had a problem with "Brand X" they simply wouldn't buy it. So long as "Brand X" had customers it would exist. Hence, freedom of choice.
In your system I would be denied choice by some anonymous entity called "Society". If society suddenly decided porn was a bad thing, I would no longer be allowed to view it.
That is socialism my friend and like Democracy, has failed everywhere it's ever been tried.
"Anyway if you look at the way advertising runs these days I don't beleive that companies truely care about any consumer too much. They're happy to play to the weakness of consumers in order to move product. Anything ranging from plain stupidity to inexperience to psychological illnesses are all fair game."
This is why I believe you are expressing dissatisfaction with OUR capitalism where a company is kept alive by shareholders and banks despite not being able to make a profit. Think what would happen if, like our countries states, every company was forced to have a balanced budget and practice fiscal responsibility (current California crisis being the exception).
Capitalism works because it puts the power into the individual. Socialism fails because it puts the power into government. Socialism is government control of an economy. To control an economy you must control people. To control people you must use force. That is not freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry but this is just bad analysis. Stacey Quandt will sooner be one of the unemployed dot-commers than Microsoft will lose it's monopoly.
First thing, people don't just up and sell their computers for no reason and fewer still change the OS on the system they already exist. Everyone I know is perfectly content with what they have right now and have no plans to upgrade. Second, even if they did want to upgrade, common sense tells them not too since they can do what they want with what they have and the extra cash is better spent elsewhere.
The life cycle of computers is increasing. I've had a DP 450 mac for 4 and a half years or so. It still runs like a champ and I have no reason thusfar to upgrade. My next machine may last me 5 years too. So how does Stacey Quandt expect Linux to overtake windows in 3 years when people are spending a lot more time with what they have now?
No, my guess is Stacey Quandt will be out of a job in 3 months. 3 years from now Stacey Quandt will be saying "Damn, I wish I had actually done my job rather than spouting propoganda. Maybe I'd still be making big bucks rather than changing cum stained bed sheets down at the Mobil 6 for a living". Analysis like this bring back the "OMFG THE NEXT BILLION DOLLAR IPO" days.
You have to meet safety standards, certified testing, crash testing, emissions etc etc etc. You can license a kit car but not one you engineer yourself.
Actually, no you can't. Safety laws still apply. This does however vary from state to state. Dynamite is illegal to explode on public and private land for example. Just because you own it doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it. I disagree with this analysis but it's the current interpretation of the law.
"They're called kitcars"
Kitcars are engineered buy a manufacturer. Putting something together from a licensed manufacturer isn't the same engineering and rolling your own. You are comparing apples and oranges.
Yes but designing your own OS from scratch does not give you the right to install it on Apples hardware for instance. Nor do you have the right to demand that you be able to install it. You bought an apple box, designed to run apple software. If you designed the OS then make the hardware to and you have all the rights you please.
He is very reasonable and debates with him are always productive. He's also not out to invade peoples homes to find pirate movies and songs, though many of the people who side with him are.
This was a great interview from what I read. I do think he skipped around the question of whether it was wrong to write a six line program to allow yourself to watch a movie.
Valenti does make a good point however. Building your own doesn't count. Try building your own car, not one from other auto makers parts. Make one from scratch using parts you engineered. Then try to get it licenced and street legal. It'll never happen. The same goes for movies. If you don't want to buy the products the industry puts out for watching the media then you don't get to watch the media. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
Where did I say I was Christian? I went to a Christian school 20 years ago. If calling someone a douchebag is what a reject like you calls tolerance then yes, I am a very tolerant person. I love how people like you jump to conclusions make the most pathetic assumptions and wrap it all up in your own ignorant sense of supieriority. What are you, like 12 years old?
"Dude, that makes no sense whatsoever. Tolerant people should tolerate intolerant people. Ain't that what it's all about? Allowing other belief systems not in agreement with your own to exist alongside yours peacefully?"
You don't tolerate crusaders, people who want to convert you, even if it means killing you to do it. That's what Christians are.
"Awesome. Ever read it for yourself? Oh wait, no"
Oh wait, yes. I spent 7 years in Christian private school. Thanks for playing, come again, NOT. You are a prime example of what I was talking about.
"Awesome. Would you like to prove it for me now using your choice of scientific papers?"
Would my 2nd grade text books suffice or do you need something with more pictures?
"How about that for respect and tolerance. "nyah nyah you suck" doesn't get anyone anywhere."
Yet thats exactly what you yourself are doing. Brilliant. Care to dig the hole a little deeper?
"You SHOULD not buy into it. You SHOULD give it scrutiny. But from your post, you haven't shown any evidence that you've looked at things for yourself."
You are making inferals on your own assumptions. You should quit while you're behind.
There is no tolerating intolerance. The bible and Christianity as a whole is the most intolerant system of beliefs in history. It's also been proven repeatedly over centuries to be B.S. yet idiots and morons still flock to it like the little lost sheep that they are. Excuse the rest of us for not buying into it and giving it the scrutiny it so rightly deserves.
It doesn't work on mobile right now so your spinning your wheels arguing against it. Some phones and some locations may work, but the vast majority does not.
You can also drop the condescending attitude. You aren't holier than thou.
As for the emergency calls, that's rather easy. Just have an encrypted "address card" sent upon connection. If not encrypted then at least signed. This can all be done rather transparently. Of course, what are the chances of that actually working? I'd say slim to none.
On one level, your 24 and prone to these feelings. I've been there, done that.
On another level. Shut up. Suck it up and be a man. Do you have any idea how many people would kill to be in your shoes right now? I lost my job in IT and now work at a damn grocery store. My bills are killing me when 2 of my old pay checks would put me back in the red. I have to listen to people like you whine all day long "waaaaah my feet hurt, my back hurts, my but hurts, so and so said this and that about me". If you can't hack it then work at McDonalds making waaah burgers and french cries.
I work with a guy that's missing an eye because a bungie cord hit him while undoing it. He's got 2 damaged disks in his back and walks with a limp. Yet everyday, he wakes up, gets to work and lifts boxes, stocks shelves and never once complains about somethng as petty as stress. He has responsibilities and comes from a generation that did what they had to do to survive, they didn't grow up like a bunch of pampered prima donas with cell phones and lattes.
Get over it. The first part to getting over it, is to quite your whinning.
I stopped reading after "or a terrorist". It's hilarious how trolls like you bring politics into every single thread. Good lord you need help.
"doesn't necessarily mean that there's been an outbreak of mass stupidity."
I never said there was, just a lack of forward thinking. Music is now easier than ever to take with you, once people catch on I have a feeling they will look at their tiny little players and say "oops". This could create some animosity towards the companies selling them, especially when they price them so close to the larger capacity players.
I just think that the jury is still out, the technology is still too new and people have yet to be educated as to the differences.
When your entire CD collection gets compacted into a component smaller than a deck of cards then yes, it's all or nothing. As opposed to running home and reconnecting and manually transfering a select few tracks every time you want a change. "God forbid" manufacturers look ahead rather than behind let alone add convienience for the consumers.
"I" am "them" as is my father, my mother and every I know who refuses to buy HDTV until everyone else has it. YOU are assuming this "study" is correct, unbiased and even somewhat logical.
People don't buy cars that get 55 miles to the gallon but only have 1 gallon of fuel storage. They buy cars that get 15 miles to the gallon and have 30 gallons of storage.
All this study shows is that people are still utterly clueless about technology, what the terminology is and what will be possible six months from now. Period.
The average joe doesn't get rid of music they no longer listen to. It will just sit there. Take my dad for example, he has 100's of CD's and he listens to the radio in his truck. He loves iTunes and may get an iPod and when he does all that music will be going in. We're talking about a guy that stores everything in C:\ and NEVER makes subfolders. That's your average user. They won't bother making playlists and selecting a song here and there to transfer. They want it all there so when they feel like listening to it they can.
Typical thinking in the "here and now". They have 1000 songs now, but what about later? These guys don't think once consumers see how easy it is that their music collection will grow?
I would not buy a device that holds 1000 songs if I only owned 999. I would buy one that holds thousands because I wouldn't want my device being obsolete in a year or less.
I own a 15 gig 3g iPod and it's almost full. I'm hardly a power user either, I just collected a shat load of CD's since childhood.
If by religious you mean common sense discussion then sure. There is literally ZERO reason to use sendmail now. There is nothing you can do with sendmail that can't be done with Postfix or qmail and you'll get better performance and security to boot.
Technology like everything else has a life span. Sendmails ended long ago, get over it.
Because of the design flaws in it and the fact that muh better MTA's now exist yet many people, some like you, refuse to migrate for the betterment of the internet.
My preference is qmail, only because I haven't used postfix in a production environment yet.
"You're assuming that the majority of consumers are ALWAYS intelligent enough that when faced with a micro-decision (eg. what soap to buy) with large scale implications (eg. what ecosystem that soap will destroy) that they'll always make the correct decision for themselves and everyone else. That's simply not true particularly when it benefits large corporations to twist the truth to suit themselves."
People make mistakes, no number of checks and balances, no intervention on anyones part will every change that. Making something idiot proof just creates more innovative idiots. Look at Apple, their OS is almost idiot proof yet still, someone every day everywhere manages to screw it up. I just prefer to lay my faith in my fellow man than my fellow mans system. Afterall, almost anything that can be done can be undone, with the exception of death and dismemberment. But then again, that's what insurance policies are for. j/k
"You're right. If you consider democrasy a failure, then you'll consider every system a failure. Capitalism and democrasy have lasted longest and worked best. That's because rewarding individual/group effort and empowering individuals works. We agree on this point."
Every system does fail. "Everything that has a beginning has an end". That's isn't from the Matrix, it's a Buddhist doctrine of impermances and it applies to everything, including socio-economic systems. The advantage to capitalism/democracy/republics is that within the system lies the tools to "undo" mistakes. In these systems revolution is possible without bloodshed, although bloodshed is also an option.
"What we don't agree on is whether or not government intervention has a part to play. Leaving it to market forces is like expecting a car to work without a driver. What we also don't agree on is whether or not a balanced budget equals a balanced approach to everything else. Money is an abstract concept of our own making and we need to make sure it represents value in real terms rather than letting the abstract concept have a life of its own."
Money is a symbol of value. Money takes lots of forms, the accounting term is "asset". My car is an asset, house too. This is of course getting more broad than I suspect is needed to make my point. Obviously government has a role to play, in OUR system. So long as Uncle Sam is taxing me he will have some influence, however large or small, on OUR economy. Our entire corporate structure is modeled to accomodate the tax system.
I think our disagreement lies in my speaking too broadly about the way things "should be" and not "the way they are" so to speak. For that I apologize but state that I think we have more in common than we perhaps realize.
Well, I don't usually reply to trolls that begin or end their replies with insults. I will however bite.
You forgot a simple thing called supply and demand in your ever so well thought out pseudo intellectual analysis. You're lack of understanding on the subject is astounding and your over simplification remarkably ignorant. I wont even get into your pathetic presumptions.
Oh and for the record I am libertarian, that's lp.org for your information and education. Now piss off troll. Expect no other replies from me.
That isn't the half of it. If the minimum wage increased at the same pace CEO wages did, it would be over 22$ an hour right now. Considering the "productivity" of our economy has gone up, and those who are the "producers" are making minimum or near minimum wages, I see it as inherantly unjust that they are the ones being shafted.
It's not about loyalty. Employment is a contract between employee and employer. Neither needs to sign if they don't wish to, and nothing is owed that isn't in said contract.
The companies inflate prices, they inflate wages to higher the best talent and as a result the cost of living also increases. To maintain living in a particular area wages must go up, period. Employees were not at fault for this.
What is happening now, is employers have been over the course of 3-4 years been demanding more productivity. This means people doing MORE work than they used to at the same or less pay. The cost of living has not lowered in most areas, it's gone up. This means, that now that jobs are coming back people are job hopping because their employers squeezed them as hard as possible with threats of ending their contracts and sending them to the unemployment line. Why stay at a company that had you doing the work of 5 of your ex-coworkers when you can now leave and get paid the same or more and do less?
It's a vicous circle and is why we are always focused on GROWTH. The bubble that burst was a growing pain. They have existed as long as economies have and will continue to exist long into the future.
"My argument is that the chief responsibility should be to no small group but society as a whole. Not the shareholders. Not the consumers. If you just aim to satisfy either group you can always cut corners and make more money by screwing up the environment, or other parties not directly involved."
That's called cutting off the nose to spite the face. Society is slang for "Majority". A majority will always vote itself special priveldges. That is why pure democracy has failed everywhere it's been tried. It is also why this nation is a republic instead.
A consumer focus is the only option as people can vote with their dollars. If society really had a problem with "Brand X" they simply wouldn't buy it. So long as "Brand X" had customers it would exist. Hence, freedom of choice.
In your system I would be denied choice by some anonymous entity called "Society". If society suddenly decided porn was a bad thing, I would no longer be allowed to view it.
That is socialism my friend and like Democracy, has failed everywhere it's ever been tried.
"Anyway if you look at the way advertising runs these days I don't beleive that companies truely care about any consumer too much. They're happy to play to the weakness of consumers in order to move product. Anything ranging from plain stupidity to inexperience to psychological illnesses are all fair game."
This is why I believe you are expressing dissatisfaction with OUR capitalism where a company is kept alive by shareholders and banks despite not being able to make a profit. Think what would happen if, like our countries states, every company was forced to have a balanced budget and practice fiscal responsibility (current California crisis being the exception).
Capitalism works because it puts the power into the individual. Socialism fails because it puts the power into government. Socialism is government control of an economy. To control an economy you must control people. To control people you must use force. That is not freedom.