To get back on track a bit, if a market is heavily influenced by a small number of players, it's not free, whether those players be the government, multinational corporations, or the mafia.
I thought that I was clear that by "government", I meant federal/state regulators. And by "free", I meant a lack of regulation by said regulators.
Yes, but they're not the only ones who can use power abusively. Those same corporations, if left unchecked, can easily become the de facto new government (and have used government powers in the past - see the history of the Pinkerton National Detective Agency).
The only thing I can think of that would help at all is the threat of corporation charter revokation, triggered by special election (not government regulators, who have that power now but never use it). It would have to be a high threshold - 75% of the vote or so. Something where it's quite clear that the people think this corporation is harmful and needs to be dissolved.
Now, I work for one of the largest banks in the world. I have security because of my overt value to the company, but I have no expectation of/loyalty/ from them-- if it became more convenient to hire a younger, cheaper person to do my job, they would. If I had a more attractive offer elsewhere, I'd leave. I have a sense of professionalism that would make me see my current project through to its logical conclusion, but that's about me and my ethics/pride cocktail, not my employer.
I wonder how much longer the common courtesy of two weeks notice will continue. Companies quite often give no notice whatsoever, and treat you like a criminal when they're escorting you out of the building. Companies also are starting to not say anything about previous employees beyond work dates and position, out of fear of getting sued.
This is simply not true, and an especially laughable concept when you have lazy, ignorant executives making more in a day than most actual workers make all year.
Carve me up and part me out. As long as it isn't before my time, I'm totally fine with that.
The bolded part is what worries me. As far as I'm concerned, as soon as I close my eyes for the last time the entire universe will cease to exist. But if a doctor who is responsible for saving my life is thinking anywhere in his mind, "There's a kid in Tennesee who could really use this guy's liver" and decides not to try so hard to keep me alive, I'm going to do whatever I can to keep that from happening even if it means my organs go to waste.
Add a turret, a video camera, and a remote control -- presto, a soldier that can march 24/7 across the desert, across the ice, through tear gas clouds, through radioactive fallout, and arrive somewhere all fresh and ready to shoot people, or drop bombs.
...
I'm an American, and these things scare me. Robert E. Lee once said "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should get too fond of it". Our government is making it significantly less terrible (for its own soldiers) all the time, and they also seem to be growing rather fond of it. When you can run a robotic war (in the air and on the ground) by remote control, what's to stop you from attacking everybody you don't like?
Combining these two sentiments, they could make the robot shoot at anything with a heat signature (no need for fancy "friend or foe" AI), and they don't even need the soldier controlling it. Keep out those pesky reporters, and you've got a genocide on your hands.
The top 40% of wage earners(people making more than $85,000) pay nearly 85% of federal taxes.
Ah, there's the rub - wage earners. They aren't the problem. It's the very very rich who make their money off of stocks and investments, who are paying less and less in taxes. If it were up to Bush, they wouldn't be paying any tax at all.
BSG actually has more atheists than almost any other show on television, which is nice to see for a change.
Probably allowable because the humans follow a "false" religion (at least it's false to its viewers), so they don't see anything wrong with not believing in it.
This reminds me of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.
Cliff notes: Slave owners couldn't track down slaves that made it to the North, so they made a law saying that federal marshals had to do it for them or face an enormous fine.
Essentially, the same thing that the RIAA is trying to do with copyright infringers - force other people to do their policing for them.
Of course we know what happened to the slave owners - they lost their legal right to own slaves entirely. Who knows how this will affect the RIAA's right to own copyrights.
Fix the system so my vote matters in a real, mathematical sense--not just in a vague moral sense.
So in other words, you want your vote to count MORE than everyone else's. After all, if you by yourself can make a real difference in a national election, that means that millions of others cannot.
- Your system disincentiveizes (yeah, its not a word, deal with it) women from joining in the first place. By effectively telling women that they will be publicly graded and judged on their reply rate, you remove the ability to "just see". While this was kindof your goal, knowing that they cant "just see" will have a very negative effect on women joining the service in the first place. After all, as a woman, would you join the service that you can just watch passively and see if something great comes up, or would you join the one that makes it your job to reply to everyone or you fail?
Probably the biggest hurdle, as most dating sites have a dearth of women and a surplus of men. They won't do anything to scare the women off (which is why several make you pay to initiate contact, but not to reply).
I really wish that they took the hint "If someone deactivates their account, odds are they want to stop being involved in the site"
I think they took a different hint - "If someone deactivates their account, we might be able to convince them to come back, and lose nothing by annoying the shit out of them."
Re:You need to clarify your question
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 1
Yes. What the politician does is legal (because he sets the rules).
Slashdot Mirror
You get an extra point to place in an attribute every four levels. This probably would not explain the heights some of these stats reach, however.
To get back on track a bit, if a market is heavily influenced by a small number of players, it's not free, whether those players be the government, multinational corporations, or the mafia.
The only thing I can think of that would help at all is the threat of corporation charter revokation, triggered by special election (not government regulators, who have that power now but never use it). It would have to be a high threshold - 75% of the vote or so. Something where it's quite clear that the people think this corporation is harmful and needs to be dissolved.
If you can't see the inherent contradiction in that statement, I can't help you.
Here's a hint - the "government" isn't just the organization with that particular title.
I can't control the law. I can control what the option under "Organ Donor" says on my driver's license.
This reminds me of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.
Cliff notes: Slave owners couldn't track down slaves that made it to the North, so they made a law saying that federal marshals had to do it for them or face an enormous fine.
Essentially, the same thing that the RIAA is trying to do with copyright infringers - force other people to do their policing for them.
Of course we know what happened to the slave owners - they lost their legal right to own slaves entirely. Who knows how this will affect the RIAA's right to own copyrights.
Then pray tell, if you are so clever, what are those methods?
If you want to go that route, become a lobbyist.
"What operating system are you running?" I ask.
"What's an operating system?"
Things go downhill from there.
Yes. What the politician does is legal (because he sets the rules).
This doesn't mean the passengers stopped them. They could have been shot down by a fighter plane.
Which is what many suspect but cannot prove either way.
So in other words, IBM is punishing you because they got caught breaking the law, by others. How do you feel about the company now?