There's no special force that compels the government to let the public know everything that it does. The government, however, has much more control over our daily lives than any given religious cult.
The first Republicans (especially Lincoln) were strong advocates of mercantilism (*NOT* capitalism) and a huge, concentrated bureaucracy instead of separate, sovereign states (which is what the Civil War was fought about).
The government really isn't *supposed* to take away your rights. Democratic government was founded on the belief that people *give up* their rights for the good of majority.
If you'd read your Locke, you'd know that citizens in a democracy do not give up their rights for the "greater good," they give up their rights in order to obtain individual protection from those who would use force to take away one's right to property, liberty, or privacy. As such, the government has a monopoly on force--it's government's job to protect you from other forms of force--either foreign or domestic. To that end it's necessary to surrender some personal liberties, such as my right to kill you and take your money.
Companies have no way to take away your rights. This is very, very important: only the government can do that. Companies can push legislation to take away your rights, just as you can push legislation to take away companies' rights. But it all comes down to government.
Out of curiosity, what is your idea for a better system than voting?
That's odd, considering neitherDell, Sony, Toshiba, nor Fujitsu require you to purchase Office XP. IBM was the only one that I saw from a quick glance.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows taskbar is flawed in that the bottom pixel of the screen doesn't represent the task a pixel above it
Yes it does. In Windows XP, anyway.
Absolute truth is redundant. Whether or not we know truth correctly is independent of whether or not truth exists.
What's six times seven?
Also, we'll probably see a rash of lawsuits or lobbying by the textbook industry to help them maintain the monopoly they have.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Except keep-alive connections are a part of HTTP 1.1. A part that Mozilla doesn't implement, apparently.
What's wrong with that? Mozilla didn't think of it first.
Congradulations, that's the most ridiculous analogy ever made in the history of mankind.
I'm not sure about atheists...
That's right. Pass the man-flesh!
I hope you mean cow embryos...
It seems like more and more corporations are putting profit margins before people...
That's why corporations exist (profits). That is nothing new. The solution to this is simple--if you don't like it, don't eat it.
I remember having to memorize the first part of it.
Whan the april with its shores soote... Or something.
If they were #1 simply because they are such nice people, and give users what they want, they wouldn't be slapped with a new lawsuit every month
And if they did that, they would have gone out of business years ago. What would Linux programmers copy from if that happened?
Sorry, that's taken.
There's no special force that compels the government to let the public know everything that it does. The government, however, has much more control over our daily lives than any given religious cult.
What's amazing is that you trust the government more by default.
Well, the US is about 10 zillion times larger than Hong Kong, not to mention about 10 zillion times less dense.
The first Republicans (especially Lincoln) were strong advocates of mercantilism (*NOT* capitalism) and a huge, concentrated bureaucracy instead of separate, sovereign states (which is what the Civil War was fought about).
You mean like this?
The government really isn't *supposed* to take away your rights. Democratic government was founded on the belief that people *give up* their rights for the good of majority.
If you'd read your Locke, you'd know that citizens in a democracy do not give up their rights for the "greater good," they give up their rights in order to obtain individual protection from those who would use force to take away one's right to property, liberty, or privacy. As such, the government has a monopoly on force--it's government's job to protect you from other forms of force--either foreign or domestic. To that end it's necessary to surrender some personal liberties, such as my right to kill you and take your money.
That doesn't make any sense. How would MS make development tools if it wasn't part of the corporation?
Companies have no way to take away your rights. This is very, very important: only the government can do that . Companies can push legislation to take away your rights, just as you can push legislation to take away companies' rights. But it all comes down to government.
Out of curiosity, what is your idea for a better system than voting?
We use it at my school as part of the telephone voice mail system.
If there are so many programmers in this community, why is isn't there a call for tighter code in this realm?
Good question, I do don't know.
That's odd, considering neitherDell, Sony, Toshiba, nor Fujitsu require you to purchase Office XP. IBM was the only one that I saw from a quick glance.
Oh my god, they're shoving RTF and HTML down our throats! How dare they!