I disagree. If there is anything that is defended in the US more then it is corporate welfare I have not seen it.
Users are being constantly disadvantaged by the patent system in terms of cost and choice of product. (try buying a galaxy tablet in Australia right now??) And they do nothing.
The only way this will change is if greedy twits cost the corporates enough for them to cry uncle. Until then....
Nice response. Very mature and on topic. Also correct in every way.
Wait a minute...its the complete opposite of what I just said!
The fact that the system allows this sort of shakedown in the first place is utterly corrupt and entirely about the patent system. If you knew more about it maybe you would see it there Polly? (is that Pollyanna or Polly wants a cracker? I cannot tell.) Just to prove your innocence to a bogus patent (and you are assuming without evidence this is so...) cost many times more than the filing of the patent. Hell, sometimes many times more than the research and wage cost of the entire discovery!
And I do understand the patent system. I also understand how corrupted by corporate donations the US govt. is also.
And finally if you have a legit claim you go after the people who have the money - business 101. Maybe you should brush up on this as well as the patents while you are at it?
So if anyone should STFU and stop being a (corporate) parrot it is yourself my good man.
One can only hope. It is greedy twits such as these that will finally get the patent system reformed.
Of course I hold out no faith of it being "fixed" since the US drives such policy worldwide and has been bought and sold by everyone who is anyone in the corporate sector. One hopes for at least incremental improvements over time though!
Unfortunately a lot of this misery comes from the direct actions of 3rd world countries. Much like a lot of the wealth you benefit from.
But in the end if you want to be a selfish person you can just be a selfish person.
You can be forced to pay taxes and other such actions that benefit others but if you belly ache about it and don't want to pay it (e.g. tea party style) then you are still just that.
So in summary: you have yours and everyone else can get stuffed? I guess from my perspective all I can hope is that at some stage you lose what you have as I cannot see how such people as you will ever get perspective - if even then. Typically your kind just get angry and blame minorities or some such.
Watching people die of starvation while gorging ourselves LITERALLY TO DEATH on fast food and causing food shortages via this and other methods is as good as killing them in my book. (Don't forget all the weapons we sell their military also...)
I forgot. This is the internet. If you make some reference to Godwin you automatically win the argument right, even if you don't say anything of actual value? Excuse me while I chuckle over how stupid this is.
ho ho ho snort.
I would argue the point further but I am fully aware that your kind do not respond to reason and logic.
They were not proposed as realistic solutions. Rather other stupid ideas that have more merit than watching entire countries starve to death.
It is not my dream.
My dream is that people like you and the poster will get a clue and start putting serious effort into making the world a better place instead of slinging cynical comments and crackpot ideas from your comfy first world armchairs. You can start by not voting in yet another bunch of greedy wankers at the next election. (NB: all the current ones are)
Of course it is just a dream. It sounds like you and I both know that the entire world is about to become one giant example of the "fate of commons".
Or perhaps we could regrow our hair, take off our jack boots, laser off our swastika tats and invest in population control?
I mean considering the amount of resources the average 1st worlder uses compared to said 3rd worlders here are some other equally harsh ideas:
- Stop eating so much meat/processed food and eat the raw ingredients instead since it is so much more efficient? - Stop just wasting resources and completely retarded things that add no value to the world apart from cheap thrills and/or convenience for the lazy? - Every first worlder to pay a "repair the world" tax which is managed internationally by the UN and goes towards fixing the world's global problems long term. (Member states of the "security council" are banned from having any influence over said fund at all, ever) - Level all major cities and have the 1st worlders live like 3rd worlders? - Drop nukes on all major cities causing an apocalyptic future that long term will be far more energy efficient for the world as a whole?
I assume of course that all these suggestions are far more abhorrent to most 1st worlders than letting children die of starvation by the million, right? Because after all they are little more than animals that should really just be culled like you would do with any other animal population that is out of control.
I realize what I am saying is harsh, but creating life in the 1st world does not entitle it to carrying on being a greedy, world destroying pig suggesting that the poorest nations in the world be left to die long, slow and painful deaths to enable us to carry on with business as usual for a few more decades.
But now you state it that way I see this was mostly an opportunity to talk about munitions rather than addressing his actual point.
Fair enough given the site, but in the context of the original argument easy to take out of your context. (there being multiple contexts at this point)
Nice attempt at a fluff argument but that does not change the core point: Munitions dropped from a remote controlled vehicle or one with a human in it are hostile. The difference is ridiculous
The law be damned.
And as to your argument? Who cares how much "thinking" went into the attacks? They are wrong or otherwise based on their merits, not what sort of ordinance was dropped on the wedding killing innocent women and children?
So by your logic if a kid "carefully plans" to go to his local high school and uses high precision rifles to assassinate only his intended targets this makes it all ok? And if he accidentally blows through a target and kills a bystander well that is sad but not intended so it is ok?
And besides which the "indiscriminately" most likely means at the macro level not the micro: They kill whoever they want (planned or otherwise) and be damned with what anyone else says.
Yes it is. I believe that was the Regan era you speak of? Well this is pretty much the same mentality.
Chomsky referred to the dems and repubs as "two arms of the business party" and it could never be more true than today.
What you are seeing with wiki (and other) leaks is an open challenge to the government-corp-media stranglehold on the truth that currently exists. (Not just in the US BTW - Murdoch and CO. are worldwide now) Obviously the government-corp-media machine needs to kill this and the legislators faithfully rise to the challenge. This "machine" of course is now heavily blurred in terms of who does what, but then you would expect that considering how closely they work together. Eg. ex politicians on the news, ex CEOs of Goldman (& others) advising the POTUS, new people hired as PR and spokespeople, lobbyists etc
So what is the big surprise?
PS: Sorry for being so cynical but at this point I really cannot see any other appropriate response, can you?
The argument is not that all games should be open ended RPGs? It is that the previously very open ended RPGs are becoming more scripted leading to a severe lack of games for these people. (of which I am one)
As the pinball wizard you would not be interested in either game I would be picking?
My example would be dragons age: origins. I bought it thinking it was an RPG and had high hopes for it because it was being talked about all over the place. I just assumed it was a great, epic RPG.
Actually it was just an interactive movie and I am not even sure I will bother finishing it. My only solace is that I bought it second hand and did not directly remunerate the company that made it. Small comfort.
I am glad you enjoy pinball, I loved pinball but was never that great at it.:) But I LOVED morrowwind. I loved oblivion also and think some people here are being unfair to that game. GTA. Infamous. Red faction. etc.
Its not their second time through. It would be their first in my example.
Someone else who had their head in the problem space has made a working, if crappy, piece of code.
Please remember that I am describing the typical "programmer's sneer" that you get all too often from the average programmer when glossing over a project or someone else's work. The problem is when they ARE an average programmer!
And to be sure: I am not talking from a self defensive position. I have had to defend other people's code bases from this more than mine. And even had to remind myself of this rule from time to time!
Or perhaps it would be just a different kind of crap?
Or perhaps the crap would creep in once they realize that they failed to reproduce many of the artifacts (aka bus. req. ) that the old code had.
Or perhaps they really are not that great and it is VERY easy to poke sticks at other people's work when you don't have to ante up yourself. This is a big one TBH. Many programmers are very arrogant with their own abilities I have found.
And I speak from someone who just finished a 1 year massive refactor on a million line codebase that WAS worth it and DID save the project in its entirety. (but the code was BROKEN when I got it, not crappy)
Actually this is very close to one of my personal beliefs on it.
Code that already exists and works has a very strong argument. In fact it is a very hard one to argue against when your code does not exist and is not currently working.
My main point here is that I have seen WAAAAAAAAAYYYYY too many arrogant programmers talking from their bum about how much better THEIR code would be if only THEY had a chance to rewrite it. Of course they would not be paying for the rewrite, have no analysed the cost/benefit of it or in fact proved that they are up to the task. And all too many are not - they are simply underestimating the effort and complexity in their little personal fantasy.
I bought one (Touch 600 model) for xmas and it is AMAZING. Totally changed the way and amount I read books. Handles a large number of formats etc.
The only thing that annoys me is the way the desktop software works. Very unintuitive and frustrating...especially grouping large numbers of books.
Fortunately it is something they can FIX (you hear me Sony, do ya?!) without me having to buy a new one. Better yet they can release a spec and OS can fix it for them.:)
Perhaps between google and the publishing companies..who tried to stop the public libraries she is talking about...
Google actually lost my vote when they blocked the very same libraries and Gutenberg from their deal. Things are not all the same and this would be a monopoly situation in the hands of a profit motivated making corporate no matter how you swing it. A timely reminder of things not always being as they are is the selling of shares by the current google masters so that they (theoretically) no longer have a majority...
It is NOT(!) ok for you to break the copyright laws (including foreign ones) to make money and block out other non-profits/community groups from having the same shot.
I would actually class that as a form of evil to be honest.
Which is a real shame. I think the concept of an international and complete library/bookstore system is awe inspiring and magical prospect.
No one walks away from all-out conflict between major nuclear powers.
Absolutely right. Those that are left sort of have the whole "shambling shuffle of the damned" going. Very swish in zombie circles I hear.
But seriously, this is all getting pretty serious. I think we seriously should have a serious global summit on it so we can get some serious traction on solving this. Like Copenhagen. Humanity has proven time and time again how great it is at overcoming its innate greed and solving the really big issues that effect our planet. We just need to apply the same to this problem as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. If there is anything that is defended in the US more then it is corporate welfare I have not seen it.
Users are being constantly disadvantaged by the patent system in terms of cost and choice of product. (try buying a galaxy tablet in Australia right now??) And they do nothing.
The only way this will change is if greedy twits cost the corporates enough for them to cry uncle. Until then....
That would be highly illegal and corrupt way of doing it!
A much simpler method is to donate money to the campaigns of politicians. No less corrupt but legal!
Nice response. Very mature and on topic. Also correct in every way.
Wait a minute...its the complete opposite of what I just said!
The fact that the system allows this sort of shakedown in the first place is utterly corrupt and entirely about the patent system. If you knew more about it maybe you would see it there Polly? (is that Pollyanna or Polly wants a cracker? I cannot tell.)
Just to prove your innocence to a bogus patent (and you are assuming without evidence this is so...) cost many times more than the filing of the patent. Hell, sometimes many times more than the research and wage cost of the entire discovery!
And I do understand the patent system. I also understand how corrupted by corporate donations the US govt. is also.
And finally if you have a legit claim you go after the people who have the money - business 101. Maybe you should brush up on this as well as the patents while you are at it?
So if anyone should STFU and stop being a (corporate) parrot it is yourself my good man.
One can only hope. It is greedy twits such as these that will finally get the patent system reformed.
Of course I hold out no faith of it being "fixed" since the US drives such policy worldwide and has been bought and sold by everyone who is anyone in the corporate sector. One hopes for at least incremental improvements over time though!
Hallelujah brother.
Please. I am not trolling. Just adding a humorous preface. (NB: humorous to non-apple fanboys)
PS: Steve Jobs for pres.
Unfortunately a lot of this misery comes from the direct actions of 3rd world countries. Much like a lot of the wealth you benefit from.
But in the end if you want to be a selfish person you can just be a selfish person.
You can be forced to pay taxes and other such actions that benefit others but if you belly ache about it and don't want to pay it (e.g. tea party style) then you are still just that.
So in summary: you have yours and everyone else can get stuffed? I guess from my perspective all I can hope is that at some stage you lose what you have as I cannot see how such people as you will ever get perspective - if even then. Typically your kind just get angry and blame minorities or some such.
I assume you are one of those apple consumers that has the religious parts of their brain activated when thinking about Apple.
Google is not trying to destroy apple, just trying to stop them destroying the smart phone/tablet market...which is their aim.
So in other words if you try to break my arm I am damned well going to break yours first if I can, or at least subdue you!!
Hence the comment on population control....
And not selling weapons to 3rd world military regimes.
And you can add not destabilizing them in the first place so you can take their natural resources.
Hence the comment about investing in population control methods such as birth control etc...
Feed them while you solve the problem. China managed it!
Here here comrade!
You do realize we just both got ourselves on the terrorist watchlist, right??
Hit a nerve did I? Good.
Watching people die of starvation while gorging ourselves LITERALLY TO DEATH on fast food and causing food shortages via this and other methods is as good as killing them in my book. (Don't forget all the weapons we sell their military also...)
I forgot. This is the internet. If you make some reference to Godwin you automatically win the argument right, even if you don't say anything of actual value? Excuse me while I chuckle over how stupid this is.
ho ho ho snort.
I would argue the point further but I am fully aware that your kind do not respond to reason and logic.
A bit like zombies and armor piercing rounds.
They were not proposed as realistic solutions. Rather other stupid ideas that have more merit than watching entire countries starve to death.
It is not my dream.
My dream is that people like you and the poster will get a clue and start putting serious effort into making the world a better place instead of slinging cynical comments and crackpot ideas from your comfy first world armchairs. You can start by not voting in yet another bunch of greedy wankers at the next election. (NB: all the current ones are)
Of course it is just a dream. It sounds like you and I both know that the entire world is about to become one giant example of the "fate of commons".
Or perhaps we could regrow our hair, take off our jack boots, laser off our swastika tats and invest in population control?
I mean considering the amount of resources the average 1st worlder uses compared to said 3rd worlders here are some other equally harsh ideas:
- Stop eating so much meat/processed food and eat the raw ingredients instead since it is so much more efficient?
- Stop just wasting resources and completely retarded things that add no value to the world apart from cheap thrills and/or convenience for the lazy?
- Every first worlder to pay a "repair the world" tax which is managed internationally by the UN and goes towards fixing the world's global problems long term. (Member states of the "security council" are banned from having any influence over said fund at all, ever)
- Level all major cities and have the 1st worlders live like 3rd worlders?
- Drop nukes on all major cities causing an apocalyptic future that long term will be far more energy efficient for the world as a whole?
I assume of course that all these suggestions are far more abhorrent to most 1st worlders than letting children die of starvation by the million, right? Because after all they are little more than animals that should really just be culled like you would do with any other animal population that is out of control.
I realize what I am saying is harsh, but creating life in the 1st world does not entitle it to carrying on being a greedy, world destroying pig suggesting that the poorest nations in the world be left to die long, slow and painful deaths to enable us to carry on with business as usual for a few more decades.
In context it certainly did not seem that way.
But now you state it that way I see this was mostly an opportunity to talk about munitions rather than addressing his actual point.
Fair enough given the site, but in the context of the original argument easy to take out of your context. (there being multiple contexts at this point)
Now I am confused...
Nice attempt at a fluff argument but that does not change the core point: Munitions dropped from a remote controlled vehicle or one with a human in it are hostile. The difference is ridiculous
The law be damned.
And as to your argument? Who cares how much "thinking" went into the attacks? They are wrong or otherwise based on their merits, not what sort of ordinance was dropped on the wedding killing innocent women and children?
So by your logic if a kid "carefully plans" to go to his local high school and uses high precision rifles to assassinate only his intended targets this makes it all ok? And if he accidentally blows through a target and kills a bystander well that is sad but not intended so it is ok?
And besides which the "indiscriminately" most likely means at the macro level not the micro: They kill whoever they want (planned or otherwise) and be damned with what anyone else says.
Yes it is. I believe that was the Regan era you speak of? Well this is pretty much the same mentality.
Chomsky referred to the dems and repubs as "two arms of the business party" and it could never be more true than today.
What you are seeing with wiki (and other) leaks is an open challenge to the government-corp-media stranglehold on the truth that currently exists. (Not just in the US BTW - Murdoch and CO. are worldwide now)
Obviously the government-corp-media machine needs to kill this and the legislators faithfully rise to the challenge.
This "machine" of course is now heavily blurred in terms of who does what, but then you would expect that considering how closely they work together. Eg. ex politicians on the news, ex CEOs of Goldman (& others) advising the POTUS, new people hired as PR and spokespeople, lobbyists etc
So what is the big surprise?
PS: Sorry for being so cynical but at this point I really cannot see any other appropriate response, can you?
I think this is a straw man.
The argument is not that all games should be open ended RPGs? It is that the previously very open ended RPGs are becoming more scripted leading to a severe lack of games for these people. (of which I am one)
As the pinball wizard you would not be interested in either game I would be picking?
My example would be dragons age: origins. I bought it thinking it was an RPG and had high hopes for it because it was being talked about all over the place. I just assumed it was a great, epic RPG.
Actually it was just an interactive movie and I am not even sure I will bother finishing it. My only solace is that I bought it second hand and did not directly remunerate the company that made it. Small comfort.
I am glad you enjoy pinball, I loved pinball but was never that great at it. :) But I LOVED morrowwind. I loved oblivion also and think some people here are being unfair to that game. GTA. Infamous. Red faction. etc.
And finally the post falls to the self conscious and unfair moderation.
I guess that pretty much proves what I am saying here. Arrogant and add blind to the equation. :)
What is very telling here is the flame bait and troll moderation going on here.
This is obviously, or should be, neither. I am relating my personal experience.
Very touchy programmers out there I think. This is not much of a surprise. I think the nail and nerve has been firmly hit on the head here.
Its not their second time through. It would be their first in my example.
Someone else who had their head in the problem space has made a working, if crappy, piece of code.
Please remember that I am describing the typical "programmer's sneer" that you get all too often from the average programmer when glossing over a project or someone else's work.
The problem is when they ARE an average programmer!
And to be sure: I am not talking from a self defensive position. I have had to defend other people's code bases from this more than mine. And even had to remind myself of this rule from time to time!
Or perhaps it would be just a different kind of crap?
Or perhaps the crap would creep in once they realize that they failed to reproduce many of the artifacts (aka bus. req. ) that the old code had.
Or perhaps they really are not that great and it is VERY easy to poke sticks at other people's work when you don't have to ante up yourself.
This is a big one TBH. Many programmers are very arrogant with their own abilities I have found.
And I speak from someone who just finished a 1 year massive refactor on a million line codebase that WAS worth it and DID save the project in its entirety. (but the code was BROKEN when I got it, not crappy)
Actually this is very close to one of my personal beliefs on it.
Code that already exists and works has a very strong argument. In fact it is a very hard one to argue against when your code does not exist and is not currently working.
My main point here is that I have seen WAAAAAAAAAYYYYY too many arrogant programmers talking from their bum about how much better THEIR code would be if only THEY had a chance to rewrite it.
Of course they would not be paying for the rewrite, have no analysed the cost/benefit of it or in fact proved that they are up to the task. And all too many are not - they are simply underestimating the effort and complexity in their little personal fantasy.
I bought one (Touch 600 model) for xmas and it is AMAZING. Totally changed the way and amount I read books. Handles a large number of formats etc.
The only thing that annoys me is the way the desktop software works. Very unintuitive and frustrating...especially grouping large numbers of books.
Fortunately it is something they can FIX (you hear me Sony, do ya?!) without me having to buy a new one. Better yet they can release a spec and OS can fix it for them. :)
I am not sure that is a fair comparison.
Perhaps between google and the publishing companies..who tried to stop the public libraries she is talking about...
Google actually lost my vote when they blocked the very same libraries and Gutenberg from their deal. Things are not all the same and this would be a monopoly situation in the hands of a profit motivated making corporate no matter how you swing it.
A timely reminder of things not always being as they are is the selling of shares by the current google masters so that they (theoretically) no longer have a majority...
It is NOT(!) ok for you to break the copyright laws (including foreign ones) to make money and block out other non-profits/community groups from having the same shot.
I would actually class that as a form of evil to be honest.
Which is a real shame. I think the concept of an international and complete library/bookstore system is awe inspiring and magical prospect.
Absolutely right. Those that are left sort of have the whole "shambling shuffle of the damned" going.
Very swish in zombie circles I hear.
But seriously, this is all getting pretty serious. I think we seriously should have a serious global summit on it so we can get some serious traction on solving this. Like Copenhagen.
Humanity has proven time and time again how great it is at overcoming its innate greed and solving the really big issues that effect our planet. We just need to apply the same to this problem as well.
GOOOOOOOOOOOO HUUUUMANITY!!!