You can't tell me that the latest boy band single that comes out is your birthright.
He's not. He's saying that our culture is our birthright - which doesn't just apply to the latest boy band single, but just as equally to the Mozart of our generation. If the musical classics had been producing under a regime of perpetual copyright, it's doubtful there would be any musical classics. Performing Beethoven without a licence would now be a criminal offence.
By "sold" you mean "given away when WoW users subscribed for a year", don't you? All sales figures I saw from D3 included those units as units sold, and never gave details on how many they gave away as part of their "Annual Subscription" deal.
For example, super-fine particulate matter (i.e., 2.5 microns in diameter), most commonly generated as a fuel combustion byproduct, is a serious contributor to adverse health effects and mortality rates; these health & life effects do translate into costs, though they aren't currently well-reflected in the prices of the products and/or energy choices you can select.
The thing is, the money captured in this process isn't used to address those externalities. It's all just income for the state, and they'll spend it on whatever vote-buying boon-doggle they're working on this month.
So you end up with expensive fuel and all the negative health/life effects. Unless you simply tax the dirty fuel enough to make it more expensive than the non-polluting kind, but then you're not really pricing externalities are you?
It's not as simple as that. Both oil and green energy are subsidised. Oil is (in some countries, like mine) then slugged a "carbon tax". Except that certain activities (individual use) get a tax rebate to compensate for the carbon tax. And the carbon tax isn't actually used to offset the damage caused by emissions (and pollutants other than carbon aren't even taxed), they're just pooled into the politico's slush fund.
The energy market is such a mish-mash of subsidies and taxes, it can't properly be thought to operate under anything resembling ideal/free market conditions, and adding or removing a tax is likely to have unforeseen repercussions due to the interrelationship of all the various rules.
That's not a description of a good idea. That's a description of an idea that fits into an arbitrary 4-year timescale that fits with a PhD program's average length.
As far as is possible with app stores, it forced some choices there that I'm sure Google didn't in any way want
If Google hadn't wanted, then they would have locked their device to their app store the same way Apple did. This decision sucks, but it only emphasises how much Google had it right when it came to Android; if Google does turn to the dark side, Android users can go somewhere else.
Being humble, but also believing that your views on how other people should live their lives are so righteous that others shouldn't even be able to decide for themselves, are mutually exclusive.
So, nobody who supports, say, laws against murder can ever possibly be humble?
Because the false claims section is toothless crap (c-3-A-v and vi). The only bit that is enforced by penalty of perjury is the declaration that the declarant represents who they say they do. The claim that the material is infringing isn't covered by perjury at all, just a "good faith belief".
On the other hand, if you downgrade to only a 100 warheads, then it's quite possible a small group of conventional strikes could remove your entire arsenal, and there goes MAD...
I wanted to by a Nexus 4 when I was upgrading from my Nexus S - I always liked the Nexus line. But the "glass sandwich" design idea was dumb for the iPhone, and it's dumb for the Nexus. I went for a Galaxy Note iI instead.
Pro-Gun people are single issue voters. Ironically you could take away every real freedom they have and so long as you left their guns alone they're OK
Any evidence of that, or just your say-so? I imagine most libertarians would be pro-gun, and they're definitely not single-issue voters. Besides, if nobody runs on gun-control, surely the pro-gun voters must have some other criteria, or they'd never vote in the first place.
hell, it's not like we couldn't train a 100,000 doctors a year for the price of America's private jets
Well, you couldn't, because the supply is controlled by the AMA, and adequate supply would remove their ability to dictate price. And there's certainly no need to go "nationalising" private property in order to fund any training you might like to do. Between the massive over-budgeting of the military, security theatre like the TSA, and general bureaucratic inefficiency, the American government could afford to fund such training simply by pulling their finger out.
There are advantages in people paying for the resources that they use.
People already do pay for email. They pay for it in form of the bandwidth they purchase from their ISP. Most people also pay someone (either their ISP in money, or a free provider in demographic data) for access to an SMTP server. This is all fine, because the money they pay is addressing the cost of delivering the service they are using.
The problem with the proposed tax is that it doesn't. It's simply somebody looking for a way to skim money off a popular service, to funnel it back into an unpopular one (presumably, if the mail service was popular, it would be self-sufficient. Either that, or it's got an unworkable price model). It's like levying a tax on fast-food so they can give it to the cafe down the street from their chambers so it doesn't go under.
And occasionally need to re-home your fingers after taking them off the keyboard. I find a quick glance down more effective than feeling around for the little home-row bumps.
And hey, for us Aussies, we're paying about a third of the standard price, since Kickstarter doesn't discriminate based on region, whereas we're gouged hard for traditional software purchases. Not to mention, if you're careful about what you back, you'll probably avoid a lot of the 50% failures.
However, at the same time, science projects and other genuinely helpful for humanity research projects struggle with their Kickstarters
I wouldn't be surprised if they struggled with their Kickstarters, since Kickstarter is exclusively for creative projects:
Everything on Kickstarter must be a project. A project has a clear goal, like making an album, a book, or a work of art. A project will eventually be completed, and something will be produced by it.
If you want to fund something with a nebulous goal, with the aim of helping someone, you make a donation, you don't pledge to a kickstarter. In a sense, donation-driven organisations are the oldest form of crowd-funding.
Getting the money is easy, but getting a product out, after all the time and all the dispersed talent, that does not suck in comparison to the original, that is a challenge
Have a look at the team they've got signed on to it:
Brian Fargo: Founded Interplay, the publisher of Planescape: Torment
Colin McCombe: Designed the pen-and-paper Planescape setting, and worked as a designer on Planescape: Torment
Monte Cook: One of the big names in D&D development. Helped develop the Planescape pen-and-paper setting, and did develop the setting for Numenera
Mark Morgan: Composer for Planescape: Torment
The only guy on their team who wasn't involved in Planescape: Torment is the project director.
The only arguments I've seen along these lines have all been one flavor or another of 'I need to work at home. I have kids there, or a dying mother. I don't have any choice but to work at home. So if I can't I'll have to quit'.
How about "I was hired when this was allowable, live in another timezone, and don't want to uproot my family to get into the office"?
Slashdot Mirror
Evolution and abiogenesis are frequently conflated. Many Christians have no problem with the former, but do not agree with the latter.
You can't tell me that the latest boy band single that comes out is your birthright.
He's not. He's saying that our culture is our birthright - which doesn't just apply to the latest boy band single, but just as equally to the Mozart of our generation. If the musical classics had been producing under a regime of perpetual copyright, it's doubtful there would be any musical classics. Performing Beethoven without a licence would now be a criminal offence.
By "sold" you mean "given away when WoW users subscribed for a year", don't you? All sales figures I saw from D3 included those units as units sold, and never gave details on how many they gave away as part of their "Annual Subscription" deal.
For example, super-fine particulate matter (i.e., 2.5 microns in diameter), most commonly generated as a fuel combustion byproduct, is a serious contributor to adverse health effects and mortality rates; these health & life effects do translate into costs, though they aren't currently well-reflected in the prices of the products and/or energy choices you can select.
The thing is, the money captured in this process isn't used to address those externalities. It's all just income for the state, and they'll spend it on whatever vote-buying boon-doggle they're working on this month.
So you end up with expensive fuel and all the negative health/life effects. Unless you simply tax the dirty fuel enough to make it more expensive than the non-polluting kind, but then you're not really pricing externalities are you?
It's not as simple as that. Both oil and green energy are subsidised. Oil is (in some countries, like mine) then slugged a "carbon tax". Except that certain activities (individual use) get a tax rebate to compensate for the carbon tax. And the carbon tax isn't actually used to offset the damage caused by emissions (and pollutants other than carbon aren't even taxed), they're just pooled into the politico's slush fund.
The energy market is such a mish-mash of subsidies and taxes, it can't properly be thought to operate under anything resembling ideal/free market conditions, and adding or removing a tax is likely to have unforeseen repercussions due to the interrelationship of all the various rules.
That's not a description of a good idea. That's a description of an idea that fits into an arbitrary 4-year timescale that fits with a PhD program's average length.
You better watch out, buddy. The cops are coming round to arrest you for stealing because you took a dump during an ad-break.
As far as is possible with app stores, it forced some choices there that I'm sure Google didn't in any way want
If Google hadn't wanted, then they would have locked their device to their app store the same way Apple did. This decision sucks, but it only emphasises how much Google had it right when it came to Android; if Google does turn to the dark side, Android users can go somewhere else.
Being humble, but also believing that your views on how other people should live their lives are so righteous that others shouldn't even be able to decide for themselves, are mutually exclusive.
So, nobody who supports, say, laws against murder can ever possibly be humble?
Because the false claims section is toothless crap (c-3-A-v and vi). The only bit that is enforced by penalty of perjury is the declaration that the declarant represents who they say they do. The claim that the material is infringing isn't covered by perjury at all, just a "good faith belief".
On the other hand, if you downgrade to only a 100 warheads, then it's quite possible a small group of conventional strikes could remove your entire arsenal, and there goes MAD...
I wanted to by a Nexus 4 when I was upgrading from my Nexus S - I always liked the Nexus line. But the "glass sandwich" design idea was dumb for the iPhone, and it's dumb for the Nexus. I went for a Galaxy Note iI instead.
Actually, water is more expensive than oil, by the gallon
Only if you buy it in little plastic bottles.
Just another loudmouth trying to generate publicity for his restaurant by being "controversial". Nothing to see here.
Pro-Gun people are single issue voters. Ironically you could take away every real freedom they have and so long as you left their guns alone they're OK
Any evidence of that, or just your say-so? I imagine most libertarians would be pro-gun, and they're definitely not single-issue voters. Besides, if nobody runs on gun-control, surely the pro-gun voters must have some other criteria, or they'd never vote in the first place.
hell, it's not like we couldn't train a 100,000 doctors a year for the price of America's private jets
Well, you couldn't, because the supply is controlled by the AMA, and adequate supply would remove their ability to dictate price. And there's certainly no need to go "nationalising" private property in order to fund any training you might like to do. Between the massive over-budgeting of the military, security theatre like the TSA, and general bureaucratic inefficiency, the American government could afford to fund such training simply by pulling their finger out.
The problem with fmail is that it doesn't work a few days every month.
There are advantages in people paying for the resources that they use.
People already do pay for email. They pay for it in form of the bandwidth they purchase from their ISP. Most people also pay someone (either their ISP in money, or a free provider in demographic data) for access to an SMTP server. This is all fine, because the money they pay is addressing the cost of delivering the service they are using.
The problem with the proposed tax is that it doesn't. It's simply somebody looking for a way to skim money off a popular service, to funnel it back into an unpopular one (presumably, if the mail service was popular, it would be self-sufficient. Either that, or it's got an unworkable price model). It's like levying a tax on fast-food so they can give it to the cafe down the street from their chambers so it doesn't go under.
Depends how long in the future. Patents have a pretty short shelf-life.
And occasionally need to re-home your fingers after taking them off the keyboard. I find a quick glance down more effective than feeling around for the little home-row bumps.
The poster's problem was that the talent had disbursed. I showed that they'd managed to re-collect at least some of it.
And hey, for us Aussies, we're paying about a third of the standard price, since Kickstarter doesn't discriminate based on region, whereas we're gouged hard for traditional software purchases. Not to mention, if you're careful about what you back, you'll probably avoid a lot of the 50% failures.
However, at the same time, science projects and other genuinely helpful for humanity research projects struggle with their Kickstarters
I wouldn't be surprised if they struggled with their Kickstarters, since Kickstarter is exclusively for creative projects:
Everything on Kickstarter must be a project. A project has a clear goal, like making an album, a book, or a work of art. A project will eventually be completed, and something will be produced by it.
If you want to fund something with a nebulous goal, with the aim of helping someone, you make a donation, you don't pledge to a kickstarter. In a sense, donation-driven organisations are the oldest form of crowd-funding.
Getting the money is easy, but getting a product out, after all the time and all the dispersed talent, that does not suck in comparison to the original, that is a challenge
Have a look at the team they've got signed on to it:
The only guy on their team who wasn't involved in Planescape: Torment is the project director.
Nope - that's the point of the exercise. You're not fired - you're quitting.
The only arguments I've seen along these lines have all been one flavor or another of 'I need to work at home. I have kids there, or a dying mother. I don't have any choice but to work at home. So if I can't I'll have to quit'.
How about "I was hired when this was allowable, live in another timezone, and don't want to uproot my family to get into the office"?