I think this is a great idea. If the government does something that intrudes into my privacy, it is OK because it is for my own safety and security. This will definitely help prevent terrorism and help us arrest all stamp-buying terrorists (defined as people who don't look like me, pray to my god or speak my language).
Let us all bow to government almighty, the one true savior, protector and retirement-saver.
Ah ha! Even assuming you are correct about us all needing a nanny state to take care of "distribution", how did we make the jump from there to FCC deciding what can be on the air and what not? How did the distributor become the censor?
Remember, all government organizations pretend to start with a small, humble purpose. Then, before you know, they are your boss and control various aspects of your life.
I am surprised we are even having this debate in USA!
The FCC was created back in the UHF days under the pretext that since there was limited UHF bandwidth available, the federal gummint had to ensure that everyone got a "fair share".
Now we have UHF, VHF, cable and satellite, so why this FCC still around?
Goes to show you that once you create a government agency it only grows bigger, it never goes away.
Get rid of the FCC and free the airwaves. Read http://www.harrybrowne.org/Harry Browne's articles for more details
I can understand your xenophobia, but most of your worries are irrelevant to India at least.
In India, medical insurance is only needed for real emergencies. Most people don't have them because most don't need them. Unlike the US, India (and many other countries) have a "radical" approach to medical treatment: You get sick, you visit a doctor or hospital in your price range immediately and they treat you! I believe this approach is called free market or something like that.
Labor laws in India are far stricter and biased towards workers than in the US (India used to be a full-fledged socialist country, remember).
Religious freedom is guaranteed in India. It has been that way for millenia. India has the second highest Muslim population in the world and the highest Christian population in Asia! It is officially a "secular" country with no state religion.
When you are apprehensive about a foreign country, it is a good idea to do some reading up about it.
Where is the libertarian candidate? I believe LP has a far bigger presence than most people think. On this forum alone, I have seen a lot of libertarians.
Actually, no country can compare to India in this respect. Remember, India does not have many dialects, it has dozens of different, major languages. These languages are more different from each other than European languages (like english, french, german etc.) because they don't even share the same script.
The reason for India's third world position is that India hitched on to the socialist bandwagon after its independence. More economic freedoms and open systems are needed before the condition improves noticeably.
Good answers. But I cannot help but feel that Greens make the right observations and the wrong conclusions.
The solution to eliminate corruption in government is not to increase the size of the government and hope it does a good job.
He says that he opposes government interference in out lives (when it comes to sexuality etc.) but at the same time he wants the government to be bigger and regulate businesses more. For example, how will he make sure that there are no GM foods? Obviously, he wants to increase government regulations about food manufacturers. This will lead to a bigger bureaucracy and more corruption, not less.
Also, he ignores various truths like (a) nuclear energy is actually safer than the alternatives and more cost effective (b) genetically modified foods are just as safe as (or safer than) organic foods and so on.
None of these three parties tackle the issue of bloated government and how to hold the individual to be above the state.
The state that I come from in India has 100% electricity coverage since the last 50 years! Every house in the even the most remote village has electricity and almost everyone nowadays has TV.
NOT FLAMEBAIT: For news stories like this, if you are totally ignorant about the foreign country being discussed, it is OK to not say anything. Seriously.
I ask this question as a libertarian - Why should libertarians contest in elections? After all, democracy is about the imposition of majority will on people with contrarian views and that is the opposite of liberty and other principles that the party stands for!
If you get elected, will you force your libertarian views on people who don't agree? Would that be a libertarian act?
Theoretically, you are right. That is how USA was *designed*. That is not how it is today. The president's office (the executive) has continually usurped more and more powers over the last 150 years. Most of the countries that USA has invaded in the last 50 years, it has been done without congress declaring war. Things have finally lead to a point where Bush's men argue that in times of war, President's powers are unlimited. And since the president can always declare vague wars against poverty, drugs, terrorism, crime, obesity etc., this means that the President can always do whatever he wants! Think about this and think about monarchies...
India's first women prime minister (Indira Gandhi) was elected back in the 60's/70's, so it is NOT a big leap. In fact, all the countries in the subcontinent have had women heads of state (Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh). And recently, Sonia Gandhi's party won the elections, but she was not elected PM.
In the Indian system (similar to the British), the PM is the head of government and the President is a figurehead, like the queen of England. He has some, limited powers. The PM is elected by people's representatives (not directly like in US, though), usually from the largest elected party.
Actually, the presidential system is more similar to monarchies than the Indian system. Look at how much Bush can do without having to answer anyone in any parliament!
Indian farmers are adults. They can (and should) feed, clothe and take care of themselves. Don't thrust your statist "someone should take care of the poor" nonsense on them.
Last thing they need is for a ignorant white guy to tell them what their priorities should be!
"Peoples" is a legal, grammatically-correct word. Look it up. It is OK to say, for example, that the United Nations represents the peoples of the world.
I know this and English is not even my mother tongue! I wonder where you learnt your grammar.
It sucks being a coder and a Dad at the same time, so I am trying to move into management. The only problem is that I will have too much time on my hands and I have to learn golf now!
As a fellow libertarian, I agree with you. But the US democratic setup is not representative (unlike UK and India). In the recent Indian elections, even the few people who voted for communists will get their opinions heard because they will send a few representatives to the parliament.
Here, the system is setup so that the voting has to be negative. That is why third parties find it hard to break through.
Getting Emperor Bush out has got to be the highest priority now.
Basically, your point is that the competition sucks! This is slashdot, so you will be castigated for that, but assuming you are right, why is it MS's fault?
You can't get Linux drivers for the hardware and whose fault is that?
Unless there is a physical threat against you, everything you decide to do is your choice. That is the very concept this country was founded on.
Let us all stop hounding successful companies, no matter how much we hate them and start worrying about the real threat that we face today - from an increasingly dominant and intrusive government!
For the record, I don't really like MS products either but the point had to be made. Sorry.
Anti-trust and these other court cases are stupid attempts on the part of the government and jealous competitors to prevail over free market economy and force their choice on the consumers.
Till date, I have not met anyone who was forced to buy a MS product. So, what exactly is the government protecting me from?
You are free to install products from other companies in your machine, on top of Linux or some other OS. You are also free to educate and evangelize other people about it, if you feel MS is so bad. Those who are too lazy to do so, simply want the law to interfere and enforce on their behalf!
It is not enough if some nerd decides that a product is superior to the commercially successful one. It is upto the paying customer to decide. Please leave that freedom alone.
There is a fundamental difference in the approaches of these two companies.
Google decides what to do, tries to do it very well and if possible, tries to make money of it. Their primary purpose seems to be to do a good job. Take google news for example - it is an excellent service and I don't see how they make money off that.
Yahoo on the other hand, would gladly sacrifice excellence in their service, for money. Nothing wrong with making money (I am behind capitalism 100%), but companies that make money by doing their job well will succeed in the long run.
The sooner Yahoo learns this, the better it is for them.
I am going to be hiding in some bunker in a fetal position (unless that is patented too) because very soon, individuals like us won't be able to do anything without law enforcement arresting us. FBI (and RIAA) monitors my internet activity waiting to catch an illegal thought (or illegal byte). Corporate lawyers are watching everything every small biz does, to see if we violated any patents or copyrights, so that they can sue our savings out of us. Where is the freedom that we constantly preach to others?
You, the individual, do not own this country. You can sing "land of the free" all you want, but it remains in name only.
To force your pet peeves and petty issues on everyone else, you constantly lobby to pass new laws that will arrest those whom you don't like. Consequently, the government has become bigger and bigger and no longer looks out for you.
There was a time when the individual was bigger than the state, now he is just a slave.
People, wake up and realize that the two points of opinion are not the left and the right. The struggle is between individual rights and the statists (which includes Democrats/liberal and republican/conservatives). And the statists have won in a big way.
The greatness of a nation hinges on the freedom of its people. Welcome to the beginning of the end of the Great American Experiment!
Couldn't a "non-outsourced" developer make the same mistake? What does this have to do with outsourcing at all? Seems to be a very leading post to me, designed to generate the usual angry, anti-outsourcing replies.
Language/tools are secondary
on
How C# Was Made
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Why do people spend so much effort fighting over which tool/language is better? The whole question is secondary to me.
The truth is - existing software quality sucks. There are a few exceptions, but there are too many poor quality products being shipped everyday sometimes costing millions of dollars. The fault is seldom with the tools or the language of choice.
There are so many parts of the whole software development process that needs to be improved. With the right process, people and management it is possible to make great software regardless of the language.
When automobile engineers argue, do they argue about the quality of their cars, their features and design or do they childishly bicker about which wrench is better?
Slashdot Mirror
Let us all bow to government almighty, the one true savior, protector and retirement-saver.
Long live the state!
Down with the tyranny of the individual!
Remember, all government organizations pretend to start with a small, humble purpose. Then, before you know, they are your boss and control various aspects of your life.
I am surprised we are even having this debate in USA!
Now we have UHF, VHF, cable and satellite, so why this FCC still around?
Goes to show you that once you create a government agency it only grows bigger, it never goes away.
Get rid of the FCC and free the airwaves. Read http://www.harrybrowne.org/Harry Browne's articles for more details
In India, medical insurance is only needed for real emergencies. Most people don't have them because most don't need them. Unlike the US, India (and many other countries) have a "radical" approach to medical treatment: You get sick, you visit a doctor or hospital in your price range immediately and they treat you! I believe this approach is called free market or something like that.
Labor laws in India are far stricter and biased towards workers than in the US (India used to be a full-fledged socialist country, remember).
Religious freedom is guaranteed in India. It has been that way for millenia. India has the second highest Muslim population in the world and the highest Christian population in Asia! It is officially a "secular" country with no state religion.
When you are apprehensive about a foreign country, it is a good idea to do some reading up about it.
Where is the libertarian candidate? I believe LP has a far bigger presence than most people think. On this forum alone, I have seen a lot of libertarians.
Actually, no country can compare to India in this respect. Remember, India does not have many dialects, it has dozens of different, major languages. These languages are more different from each other than European languages (like english, french, german etc.) because they don't even share the same script. The reason for India's third world position is that India hitched on to the socialist bandwagon after its independence. More economic freedoms and open systems are needed before the condition improves noticeably.
The solution to eliminate corruption in government is not to increase the size of the government and hope it does a good job.
He says that he opposes government interference in out lives (when it comes to sexuality etc.) but at the same time he wants the government to be bigger and regulate businesses more. For example, how will he make sure that there are no GM foods? Obviously, he wants to increase government regulations about food manufacturers. This will lead to a bigger bureaucracy and more corruption, not less.
Also, he ignores various truths like (a) nuclear energy is actually safer than the alternatives and more cost effective (b) genetically modified foods are just as safe as (or safer than) organic foods and so on.
None of these three parties tackle the issue of bloated government and how to hold the individual to be above the state.
NOT FLAMEBAIT: For news stories like this, if you are totally ignorant about the foreign country being discussed, it is OK to not say anything. Seriously.
If you get elected, will you force your libertarian views on people who don't agree? Would that be a libertarian act?
People have stopped staying that for a long time now. If you don't know that, get out from under the r...
Theoretically, you are right. That is how USA was *designed*. That is not how it is today. The president's office (the executive) has continually usurped more and more powers over the last 150 years. Most of the countries that USA has invaded in the last 50 years, it has been done without congress declaring war. Things have finally lead to a point where Bush's men argue that in times of war, President's powers are unlimited. And since the president can always declare vague wars against poverty, drugs, terrorism, crime, obesity etc., this means that the President can always do whatever he wants! Think about this and think about monarchies...
In the Indian system (similar to the British), the PM is the head of government and the President is a figurehead, like the queen of England. He has some, limited powers. The PM is elected by people's representatives (not directly like in US, though), usually from the largest elected party.
Actually, the presidential system is more similar to monarchies than the Indian system. Look at how much Bush can do without having to answer anyone in any parliament!
Last thing they need is for a ignorant white guy to tell them what their priorities should be!
I know this and English is not even my mother tongue! I wonder where you learnt your grammar.
It sucks being a coder and a Dad at the same time, so I am trying to move into management. The only problem is that I will have too much time on my hands and I have to learn golf now!
Here, the system is setup so that the voting has to be negative. That is why third parties find it hard to break through.
Getting Emperor Bush out has got to be the highest priority now.
You can't get Linux drivers for the hardware and whose fault is that?
Unless there is a physical threat against you, everything you decide to do is your choice. That is the very concept this country was founded on.
Let us all stop hounding successful companies, no matter how much we hate them and start worrying about the real threat that we face today - from an increasingly dominant and intrusive government!
For the record, I don't really like MS products either but the point had to be made. Sorry.
Till date, I have not met anyone who was forced to buy a MS product. So, what exactly is the government protecting me from?
You are free to install products from other companies in your machine, on top of Linux or some other OS. You are also free to educate and evangelize other people about it, if you feel MS is so bad. Those who are too lazy to do so, simply want the law to interfere and enforce on their behalf!
It is not enough if some nerd decides that a product is superior to the commercially successful one. It is upto the paying customer to decide. Please leave that freedom alone.
Google decides what to do, tries to do it very well and if possible, tries to make money of it. Their primary purpose seems to be to do a good job. Take google news for example - it is an excellent service and I don't see how they make money off that.
Yahoo on the other hand, would gladly sacrifice excellence in their service, for money. Nothing wrong with making money (I am behind capitalism 100%), but companies that make money by doing their job well will succeed in the long run.
The sooner Yahoo learns this, the better it is for them.
I am going to be hiding in some bunker in a fetal position (unless that is patented too) because very soon, individuals like us won't be able to do anything without law enforcement arresting us. FBI (and RIAA) monitors my internet activity waiting to catch an illegal thought (or illegal byte). Corporate lawyers are watching everything every small biz does, to see if we violated any patents or copyrights, so that they can sue our savings out of us. Where is the freedom that we constantly preach to others?
To force your pet peeves and petty issues on everyone else, you constantly lobby to pass new laws that will arrest those whom you don't like. Consequently, the government has become bigger and bigger and no longer looks out for you.
There was a time when the individual was bigger than the state, now he is just a slave.
People, wake up and realize that the two points of opinion are not the left and the right. The struggle is between individual rights and the statists (which includes Democrats/liberal and republican/conservatives). And the statists have won in a big way.
The greatness of a nation hinges on the freedom of its people. Welcome to the beginning of the end of the Great American Experiment!
This raises serious questions about employing southpaws in software projects!!!
Couldn't a "non-outsourced" developer make the same mistake? What does this have to do with outsourcing at all? Seems to be a very leading post to me, designed to generate the usual angry, anti-outsourcing replies.
The truth is - existing software quality sucks. There are a few exceptions, but there are too many poor quality products being shipped everyday sometimes costing millions of dollars. The fault is seldom with the tools or the language of choice.
There are so many parts of the whole software development process that needs to be improved. With the right process, people and management it is possible to make great software regardless of the language.
When automobile engineers argue, do they argue about the quality of their cars, their features and design or do they childishly bicker about which wrench is better?
Thanks for the kind words, Sir.