"But the reason we're not excited by it is because we live in a society where if you don't have a job, you are left to die."
We do have welfare programs and even housing programs that pay as much as some basic income proposals. So while it is true your life can suck horribly if you don't have a job, you won't be left to die.
. If things were based on merit, Microsoft wouldnâ(TM)t have dominated the computer industry for several decades. A spoiled rich kid with a big mouth wouldnâ(TM)t be president of the US.
I used to think he was corrupt because I read the newspapers, which didn't like him at all. When I investigated deeper, it seems like he knew how to keep things legal, and the newspapers just didn't like him for some reason. He's just really good at playing the game.
The most in fear of my life I've ever been was during a mayoral debate I was at in 2000.
The business value of open source is 99% free and 1% open.
In my experience, that's not true. At least, companies I've worked for have been willing to pay for open-source libraries. Getting closed-source (or closed to me) libraries have caused me serious problems in the past, though.
As an example many people are familiar with, Google was willing to pay Sun for using Java. It wasn't about money. Sun didn't want to let Google change Java though, which is what Google wanted.
I think you need to do more research into what makes startups successful. I recommend reading Founders at Work, but you can look wherever you want. Your ignorance of actual data is showing.
The person I look at with a lot of respect is Willy Brown. That is a guy who had everything stacked against him. If you're whining about it today, you don't have as many challenges as he did. You weren't born in a segregated town with mob violence, shining shoes of white folks. He did, but he answered the question, "When challenges arise, how do you respond to them?"
He got the right answer. People who rant on the internet have the wrong answer. Willie Brown went on to change society in his own way, so that's a good thing to do.
How do you respond to it is just the usual alt-right/libertarian tactic to delay doing ANYTHING.
That is not even a grammatically correct sentence, mate.
Hmm, I guess I'll trust your uninformed speculation over the thousands of people who study this stuff for a living.
This paper isn't a scientific study. Check it out. These are people trying to make a political point, to push their agenda forward (athough in fairness that probably happens everytime politicians get together). These people are trying to push forward their economic agenda, though, some of which is good, and some of which is bad.
If you look at the "recommendations" section, you can see what they want us to do:
"Current patterns of consumption, production and inequality are not sustainable....[Solutions] include changes in lifestyle, consumption preferences and consumer behaviour on the one hand, and cleaner production processes, resource efficiency and decoupling, corporate responsibility and compliance on the other hand....Efforts to combat biodiversity loss must also address poverty eradication, food security challenges, gender inequality, systemic inefficiencies and corruption in governance structures and other social variables.
So there it is, that's what we have to do to stop global warming: you need to change your consumption preferences, and all those social variables.
Its astonishingly hard to get rich without a hefty dose of working capital
If you know how to use money to make more, people will be falling over themselves to give you capital. Getting money isn't a problem in the real world.
Generally you need to be smart, hard working
That's conventional wisdom, right? "Gotta work ten hour days at your startup to make it a success." Interestingly it's not true, some startups succeed without overworking themselves. Really though, what are you going to do in those extra two hours that you can't hire someone to do? Working long hours is just penny-pinching and inefficient unless you are working to overcome a temporary crisis or something.
Slashdot Mirror
"But the reason we're not excited by it is because we live in a society where if you don't have a job, you are left to die."
We do have welfare programs and even housing programs that pay as much as some basic income proposals. So while it is true your life can suck horribly if you don't have a job, you won't be left to die.
I can't say for sure, but I'd bet backhoes made things easier for ditch diggers. At least, for the few who remained in the profession.
We know how to deal with it, it's just that the defenders of the current status quo, especially people like you, don't want to do those things.
You assume you know my race.
Complain all you want, I'll be out making money. If you need my help on a vote, let me know: I'll probably vote on your side.
You still didn't read it lol. Stop being lazy, gain some knowledge, and you'll have something realistic to say.
I read the part where you want other people to change. You have no intention of changing, of course. It's always the other people.
That's true, I was in Modesto at the time.
. If things were based on merit, Microsoft wouldnâ(TM)t have dominated the computer industry for several decades. A spoiled rich kid with a big mouth wouldnâ(TM)t be president of the US.
You're measuring 'merit' the wrong way.
When it comes to work, there are two kinds of people in the world: those who get things done, and those who don't.
Hire the ones who do.
The most in fear of my life I've ever been was during a mayoral debate I was at in 2000.
I don't know what that was about.
Well you mischaracterized it intentionally, as you do often.
Nope. If you had read it, you would know that I captured the main points of their solution.
in some circles, where software is a much higher quality
Which circles are those? I want to join.
The business value of open source is 99% free and 1% open.
In my experience, that's not true. At least, companies I've worked for have been willing to pay for open-source libraries. Getting closed-source (or closed to me) libraries have caused me serious problems in the past, though.
As an example many people are familiar with, Google was willing to pay Sun for using Java. It wasn't about money. Sun didn't want to let Google change Java though, which is what Google wanted.
Well you mischaracterized it intentionally, as you do often. Regardless of who here reads it,,
Unfortunately, you didn't read it.
I think you need to do more research into what makes startups successful. I recommend reading Founders at Work, but you can look wherever you want. Your ignorance of actual data is showing.
Doesn't sound unreasonable. Americans
I see, those Americans are the ones who need to consume less. The good Europeans like you are fine.
A compilation of the results of several studies, all which more or less point to the same conclusion definitively using different methodologies.
Well you didn't read it.
Yeah you do. You start off with $2 million (1970s dollars). You then show you were able to use money to make money
Oh yeah? You really think that's how venture capital and angel investing works? I seriously have no idea where you are getting this information.
He got the right answer. People who rant on the internet have the wrong answer. Willie Brown went on to change society in his own way, so that's a good thing to do.
How do you respond to it is just the usual alt-right/libertarian tactic to delay doing ANYTHING.
That is not even a grammatically correct sentence, mate.
Hmm, I guess I'll trust your uninformed speculation over the thousands of people who study this stuff for a living.
This paper isn't a scientific study. Check it out. These are people trying to make a political point, to push their agenda forward (athough in fairness that probably happens everytime politicians get together). These people are trying to push forward their economic agenda, though, some of which is good, and some of which is bad.
If you look at the "recommendations" section, you can see what they want us to do:
"Current patterns of consumption, production and inequality are not sustainable....[Solutions] include changes in lifestyle, consumption preferences and consumer behaviour on the one hand, and cleaner production processes, resource efficiency and decoupling, corporate responsibility and compliance on the other hand. ...Efforts to combat biodiversity loss must also address poverty eradication, food security challenges, gender inequality, systemic inefficiencies and corruption in governance structures and other social variables.
So there it is, that's what we have to do to stop global warming: you need to change your consumption preferences, and all those social variables.
For example, if an employer throws away the applications of minorities, then it's not a level playing field is it. And that HAS happened
Yeah, and sometimes you get rejected for a job because you are old. That has happened to me.
The question is, how do you respond to it? The answer to that question is going to be everything.
It's like sex. Looks help, but they're really not what matters.
How do you demonstrate that you can do more than talk a good game?
You don't. All you have to do is talk good game.
Rich people stay rich because they have rich habits and skills. Poor people stay poor because they have poor habits and skills.
Its astonishingly hard to get rich without a hefty dose of working capital
If you know how to use money to make more, people will be falling over themselves to give you capital. Getting money isn't a problem in the real world.
Generally you need to be smart, hard working
That's conventional wisdom, right? "Gotta work ten hour days at your startup to make it a success." Interestingly it's not true, some startups succeed without overworking themselves. Really though, what are you going to do in those extra two hours that you can't hire someone to do? Working long hours is just penny-pinching and inefficient unless you are working to overcome a temporary crisis or something.