Yeah, I like this argument: An institution can at times become corrupt and stop working. Therefore the institution is completely non-functional and must be destroyed. It's a good thing you're ilk's in charge of Democracy. Heck, we couldn't even have Monarchy ('nother institution that can be corrupted). Libertarian Paradise and turtles all the way down. But now you've got me trolling so I'll quit while I'm ahead.
This is pretty well documented. In America if you want to hire someone for a tech job on a work Visa by law you have to "prove" there is no American capable of doing the job. The easiest way to do this is to have very, very specific requirements. There are law firms that teach companies how to do this without breaking the law, and the gov't is pretty much complicit in this (thanks to 30 years of non stop attacks on perceived 'Bureaucracies' brought on by people that don't like the DMV). Compounding this you have schools in India and China that exist to rubber stamp people with any qualification needed.
It mostly works because the vast majority of tech workers aren't MIT graduate rock stars but rank and file workers. There's nothing wrong with that, but it means you're easily interchangeable. But us tech workers also have big, big egos, so we're convinced that Unions and lobbying to protect your interests is for losers who just couldn't hack it (and if they lose their jobs and end up a Walmart they blame themselves anyway...).
Cyanogen is expanding and going commercial. By definition that means they'll be looking to bring in new users that traditionally wouldn't be considering their product. That pretty much means they're going to have non-tech savvy users stumbling across it, and they'll be using sales tactics (since it's a product now) to get them to install it.
I can't say I like that they're out of the store but I can see why google did it...
which as near as I can tell is code for Wealth Inequality. Around 2003 the rich made a major money grab, netting the biggest gains in history while saddling everyone else with massive debt. You've probably got a lot of Europeans putting in American style 60 hour (high stress) work weeks. They're also probably drinking more sugary caffeinated drinks to cope with the extra workload needed to keep their heads above water while their wages plummet.
So basically, cut peoples standard of living through a program of massive wealth transference to the top 1% and their life expectancies go down. Who knew?
"A hate crime law is a law intended to prevent bias-motivated violence. Hate crime laws are distinct from laws against hate speech in that hate crime laws enhance the penalties associated with conduct that is already criminal under other laws, while hate speech laws criminalize a category of speech."
It's not so much about the abstract thought of hate, but that your hate motivated the crime in question. The reason for the stiffer penalties is to discourage the behavior or to lock up perpetrators longer. They came about in the American South because when one KKK guy lynched a black man it encouraged others to do it when they saw the 1st guy get away with it.
Intent to Distribute is just a formal way of saying somebody had more pot than they could ever smoke.
Right now the people in the UK have enough of a social safety net (subsidized health care and education, enough money to afford beer and tv, etc) to maintain a bit more sanity, but their Conservative party wants that stuff taken away because you can't dream when your every waking minute isn't a constant, terrified struggle for survival.
Yeah, but rarely is the question asked: is it worth it? Is making this many lives horrible worth what we're getting out of it? Most of us/.ers are in the 'haves' category though, so we're likely to say 'yes'. Occasionally somebody spares a thought for kids making toys in China or the dead garment workers in Indonesia, but then along comes the next year and we move on.
I don't really think we should live in a world were people live that desperate and frantic. But then again what can I really do about it?
They can go home, but they don't get to take the ball. If they don't want to participate in the economy they don't get to own it. That's what "Eminent Domain" is for. If you let them a small group of people will claim ownership of everything. What you end up with is a huge amount of under utilized capital. It sits around doing nothing and the entire economy grinds to a halt. Before long you see "Dark Ages" like Europe. Once that happens you either tax the rich and use the taxes to get people moving again or wait for a plague to kill them off...
we don't think laws are going to do anything magical. But we do think doing something is better than nothing. And history pretty much bears that out. Things got better when we stopped letting bankers do things that caused busts. That's what Glass-Steagal was going and it worked great until Clinton gutted it (because he felt being pro-Corporate was the only way to win a US Presidential Election).
We _can_ learn from the past. We _can_ do better. The only magic I see is the slight of the "Invisible" hand swiping my wallet...
if you're willing to admit you're wrong when new data becomes available. Socialists are. We're also not willing to let something as complex as an economy or as important as the future of civilization be dictated by random chance and the whims of a few lucky (or ruthless) winners.
Japan had laws like this for years, and they kept worker wages high. It was only when the laws were repealed you started seeing traditional western style wealth inequality. Now Japan's back to tent cities for the homeless. Something I never thought I'd see in that country.
As for the rich using loop holes; just because something is hard to do doesn't mean you don't do it. I've noticed that capitalists throw their hands up and say "I give" at the slightest challenge. As near as I can tell the "Free Market" means leaving things to chance and hoping for the best. I've never once in my life seen a situation where people just let the chips fall where they will and had it be anything more than a cluster-!#$@.
What I'm saying is the solution to our problems isn't hoping some vague principles and ideas will guide us to utopia (an "Invisible Hand" if you will). We need direct human action followed by careful adjustment of policies based and continual testing and data collection. You know, someone should give that method a name. It sounds kinda, I don't know, "Scientific"...
No, Communism is worker controlled means of production. Socialism is using a large, powerful institution to regulate the distribution of wealth.
Words can and do change their meaning, and people can improve on systems through careful application of basic Scientific principles. e.g. not taking anything on faith and being willing to admit when you're wrong. Socialists have long since recognized that the State can't take over the means of production. You never get past the "Dictatorship of the proletariat" phase. Instead we advocate a complex system that lends itself well to checks and balances.
That's sorta what makes real Socialism work. The only "principle" we have is that everyone is entitles to a good life, with food, shelter and health care. And we're willing to admit when we're wrong and adjust accordingly. The result is a system that is harder to maintain but also harder to exploit.
it's more the contractors refusing to train and keep their hires. Nobody wants to keep someone around. They cost more every year. But for programmers that means nobody knows how anything works. It keeps profits high for the guy running the sub-contractor, but it means crummy software...
would go around telling people that? After some thank yous from the/. community to fear and distrust it would cause would doom the company, and ticking off the feds wouldn't help either...
but at $1250 I'm not sure who it's for. I can almost buy a Mac book for that. Maybe developers in need of a linux laptop? Are there that many of them? A lot of my nerd friends could be talking into buying this, but they wouldn't do much with it...
if a country's so poor their entire economy is farm based isn't the goal to get the price of food (and other necessities) low enough that people start having disposable income? The 'Big Mac Index' I think it's called.
Slashdot Mirror
I have the same password on my matched luggage!
for their first Crazy Climber.
but don't take away the service requirements. But we couldn't do that because of Socalisms...
I'm more of a wasd kinda guy.
Yeah, I like this argument: An institution can at times become corrupt and stop working. Therefore the institution is completely non-functional and must be destroyed. It's a good thing you're ilk's in charge of Democracy. Heck, we couldn't even have Monarchy ('nother institution that can be corrupted). Libertarian Paradise and turtles all the way down. But now you've got me trolling so I'll quit while I'm ahead.
This is pretty well documented. In America if you want to hire someone for a tech job on a work Visa by law you have to "prove" there is no American capable of doing the job. The easiest way to do this is to have very, very specific requirements. There are law firms that teach companies how to do this without breaking the law, and the gov't is pretty much complicit in this (thanks to 30 years of non stop attacks on perceived 'Bureaucracies' brought on by people that don't like the DMV). Compounding this you have schools in India and China that exist to rubber stamp people with any qualification needed.
It mostly works because the vast majority of tech workers aren't MIT graduate rock stars but rank and file workers. There's nothing wrong with that, but it means you're easily interchangeable. But us tech workers also have big, big egos, so we're convinced that Unions and lobbying to protect your interests is for losers who just couldn't hack it (and if they lose their jobs and end up a Walmart they blame themselves anyway...).
Cyanogen is expanding and going commercial. By definition that means they'll be looking to bring in new users that traditionally wouldn't be considering their product. That pretty much means they're going to have non-tech savvy users stumbling across it, and they'll be using sales tactics (since it's a product now) to get them to install it.
I can't say I like that they're out of the store but I can see why google did it...
they probably just want the patents and some of the staff.
which as near as I can tell is code for Wealth Inequality. Around 2003 the rich made a major money grab, netting the biggest gains in history while saddling everyone else with massive debt. You've probably got a lot of Europeans putting in American style 60 hour (high stress) work weeks. They're also probably drinking more sugary caffeinated drinks to cope with the extra workload needed to keep their heads above water while their wages plummet.
So basically, cut peoples standard of living through a program of massive wealth transference to the top 1% and their life expectancies go down. Who knew?
Well, to be fair it was a good price for 12 pounds of nutmeg
From Wikipedia:
"A hate crime law is a law intended to prevent bias-motivated violence. Hate crime laws are distinct from laws against hate speech in that hate crime laws enhance the penalties associated with conduct that is already criminal under other laws, while hate speech laws criminalize a category of speech."
It's not so much about the abstract thought of hate, but that your hate motivated the crime in question. The reason for the stiffer penalties is to discourage the behavior or to lock up perpetrators longer. They came about in the American South because when one KKK guy lynched a black man it encouraged others to do it when they saw the 1st guy get away with it.
Intent to Distribute is just a formal way of saying somebody had more pot than they could ever smoke.
Here you go.
Right now the people in the UK have enough of a social safety net (subsidized health care and education, enough money to afford beer and tv, etc) to maintain a bit more sanity, but their Conservative party wants that stuff taken away because you can't dream when your every waking minute isn't a constant, terrified struggle for survival.
Oh, bonus points for /. if you can resist the obvious "...is are children learning' follow up to my post.
Yeah, but rarely is the question asked: is it worth it? Is making this many lives horrible worth what we're getting out of it? Most of us /.ers are in the 'haves' category though, so we're likely to say 'yes'. Occasionally somebody spares a thought for kids making toys in China or the dead garment workers in Indonesia, but then along comes the next year and we move on.
I don't really think we should live in a world were people live that desperate and frantic. But then again what can I really do about it?
They can go home, but they don't get to take the ball. If they don't want to participate in the economy they don't get to own it. That's what "Eminent Domain" is for. If you let them a small group of people will claim ownership of everything. What you end up with is a huge amount of under utilized capital. It sits around doing nothing and the entire economy grinds to a halt. Before long you see "Dark Ages" like Europe. Once that happens you either tax the rich and use the taxes to get people moving again or wait for a plague to kill them off...
we don't think laws are going to do anything magical. But we do think doing something is better than nothing. And history pretty much bears that out. Things got better when we stopped letting bankers do things that caused busts. That's what Glass-Steagal was going and it worked great until Clinton gutted it (because he felt being pro-Corporate was the only way to win a US Presidential Election).
We _can_ learn from the past. We _can_ do better. The only magic I see is the slight of the "Invisible" hand swiping my wallet...
if you're willing to admit you're wrong when new data becomes available. Socialists are. We're also not willing to let something as complex as an economy or as important as the future of civilization be dictated by random chance and the whims of a few lucky (or ruthless) winners.
Japan had laws like this for years, and they kept worker wages high. It was only when the laws were repealed you started seeing traditional western style wealth inequality. Now Japan's back to tent cities for the homeless. Something I never thought I'd see in that country.
As for the rich using loop holes; just because something is hard to do doesn't mean you don't do it. I've noticed that capitalists throw their hands up and say "I give" at the slightest challenge. As near as I can tell the "Free Market" means leaving things to chance and hoping for the best. I've never once in my life seen a situation where people just let the chips fall where they will and had it be anything more than a cluster-!#$@.
What I'm saying is the solution to our problems isn't hoping some vague principles and ideas will guide us to utopia (an "Invisible Hand" if you will). We need direct human action followed by careful adjustment of policies based and continual testing and data collection. You know, someone should give that method a name. It sounds kinda, I don't know, "Scientific"...
No, Communism is worker controlled means of production. Socialism is using a large, powerful institution to regulate the distribution of wealth.
Words can and do change their meaning, and people can improve on systems through careful application of basic Scientific principles. e.g. not taking anything on faith and being willing to admit when you're wrong. Socialists have long since recognized that the State can't take over the means of production. You never get past the "Dictatorship of the proletariat" phase. Instead we advocate a complex system that lends itself well to checks and balances.
That's sorta what makes real Socialism work. The only "principle" we have is that everyone is entitles to a good life, with food, shelter and health care. And we're willing to admit when we're wrong and adjust accordingly. The result is a system that is harder to maintain but also harder to exploit.
it's more the contractors refusing to train and keep their hires. Nobody wants to keep someone around. They cost more every year. But for programmers that means nobody knows how anything works. It keeps profits high for the guy running the sub-contractor, but it means crummy software...
better 1000 innocent men punished than 1 guilty man go free....
since the PS1. The Saturn had troubles. The Dreamcast had troubles. This is nothing new. hat I don't get is why people act surprised.
would go around telling people that? After some thank yous from the /. community to fear and distrust it would cause would doom the company, and ticking off the feds wouldn't help either...
but at $1250 I'm not sure who it's for. I can almost buy a Mac book for that. Maybe developers in need of a linux laptop? Are there that many of them? A lot of my nerd friends could be talking into buying this, but they wouldn't do much with it...
if a country's so poor their entire economy is farm based isn't the goal to get the price of food (and other necessities) low enough that people start having disposable income? The 'Big Mac Index' I think it's called.