I completely agree with your post, but surely you must realize that it doesnt work like this anymore.
THe idea before is that there were no significant differences in technology between militia-level tech and army-level tech. Nowawadys, army-level tech is insanely more powerful than anything any individual citizen (hency militia-level) can. Think Helicopter, Tank, Strategic Missile, etc etc.
The only way to win a revolt now is to have the some or all of the army on your side. Otherwise, if it comes to shooting matches, the populace will lose.
So, given that logic, your average rifle or handgun wont really mean much, other than for show. Guess what, we would have to revert to terrorist-like actions and tactics.
Regardless of what makes marxism simpler, its still a failed concept.
At its base, marxism assumes that society is made up of two distinct, non-mixing classes (a la Owners vs Workers, proletariat vs bourgeoisie). This is a critical flaw, especially when applied to societies like the US, where many begin as one and end as another. This is all aside from the fact that we have more than two classes. At very least, there are five in the US. The unemployed poor, the working poor, the middle, the middle upper, and the elite. The dynamics between these classes are not so simply defined as Marx would prefer.
Simple put, Marx was a hack with a great ability to swing others to his views. His theories are base and elementary and they dont allow real societies to function. Hence the failing / transformations of most communist countries into functional socialism.
Thus preventing 9-11. Thus preventing the nuke-and-meth invasion. The rest of the world has nothing we need. They've got stuff we want, but we could make it all here if we wanted to.
You really think closing our borders to international trade would have prevented 9/11? Please. I dont believe terrorists are that logical in any sense. They need someone to hate. If we closed our borders and didnt use their oil, they would hate us for that. Or they would hate us for not sharing food. Terrorists are not logical people, dont give them such credit.
The Meth invasion?? Dude, how would closing our borders prevent illegal drugs from being manufactured here? Just like during prohibition, a closing of the borders would just improve shady dealings more than they are even today. More thugs, more drug money, more incidental death. Besdies, what do you care if some jackhole wants to kill himself with meth. I certainly dont, as long as I dont get caught in some crossfire of bullets between him and a rival.
Maybe it should. Maybe we should start killing the free traitors.
Whatever that means, Im not sure. Regardless, the whole line about killing anyone arbitrarily just doesnt fly. Who decides? you? Great. Anarchy. Certainly a lot of people decide, but its not any one individuals role to make such decisions quickly and without trial. Nice try, hitler.
Better off how? All I see is MORE poverty, fewer middle class individuals, and a group of rich people who are so scared of protecting their weath that they spend 200 days a year in the Bahammas to avoid US Taxes. That's not better off in my book.
I agree. I'm not saying we are doing that great of a job currently. All I am arguing is that things would be worse given your set of parameters. Do you think all those "People with money" would just stick around and wait for the local isolated economy to tank? Fuck no. They would take their money to Geneva and then the US would be a country full of people without enough money to re-jumpstart it.
Businesses, of any time, require two things: Human Capital and Financial Capital. If the financial capital goes away, you are stuck.
Actually I did. They're gone now- the risk happened to be 100% just like it is with any small business. If you actually do have success, that's when the men come to break your kneecaps and threaten your family.
No. Thats not how it works. This isnt china. I have had numerous small businesses, and no one came to break my kneecaps. Unless you deal in drugs, guns, gambling, or prostitution, I really cant see your situation happening to average business people. It just doesnt happen anymore.
Perhaps its time for some personal responsibility. Isnt it at least remotely possible that the reason you are where you are is because of decisions you made? Sure its convenient to blame the easy targets, but you are in your situation due to your own mistakes. It takes a strong man to admit that hes a failure due to his own mistakes, and an even stronger one to fix it once he has made that realization.
Do you have any idea what the implications would be had bush, or any other president, taken your advice?
What you are advocating is isolation, or at best highly restricted free trade. All it does is piss off other countries when you "insured that Americans would have other jobs by closing the borders to imports". Can you think of what they would have done? Closed us off.
Guess what, America lives or dies by its exports. Its exports of services, of entertainment, of culture, of business. It does NOT live or die by its programmers or software development industry.
The choice was made, and it was correct, and its unpleasant that you were on the losing end, but all in all, the country is better for not being isolationist like you seem to prefer.
All you are is mimicing the pissed off "They took our jobs" line that every other self righteous, and subsequently unemployed person uses. Next time, stop bitching, and start working to change your career or start your own business. You had savings, as you said -- you just werent willing to risk them to do your own thing.
No, they saved their ass. You are, generally, never liable for incorrect charges on your bill. Guess who is liable? Here is a hint, its not the CC companies either...
The reason people sign on the dotted line is so that you cant refute it later. Without that signature, the vendor has no claim to your cash.
Dont kid yourself. Public companies are perhaps the BEST at doing something that will lose the money over the short or long term.
The companies that are best at making money are mid size companies. Hence why they grow into large companies, original management moves out or retires, and corporate stooges step in -- who have no real money invested.
Thats the real problem with big big big public companies -- all the people invested arent anywhere near or have any idea what goes on in said company.
It wouldnt suprise me at all if Google starts feeling the pain on some of these fancy "innovations" they seem to be on about. Right now they are able to fund such nonsense with a immensly hyped stock price and wonderful public relations.
Ahh Yes. Not only did you complete miss the point and counterpoint of all posts involved (mixing them all up), you also managed to post AC while using such wonderful phrases as "fuckin stupid" and "fuckin liberal ideals".
I think someone needs to sit on a sofa and chit chat with a professional before he runs through office/school building with an AK. Or at very worst, post using your account to take some accountability for what you are saying. It really means more when you are willing to stand behind your points instead of hide like a little AC bitch.
Im not assuming the GP is a man, you are. In what sense does commenting on his language make me homophobic? Im simple pointing out what it seems to be -- more than just friends. I have plenty of gay friends, and they would likely agree with my comments about the GP. You inferred that because I was asking that I was making some judgement. Think again.
I was in highschool a few years ago when I met on of the most respected men in my life. He came to the school in the form of a "nice" Bofh. Living in a small town I was the only person I knew at school that used linux, until that year when I met my two geek friends. The one I'm talking of in this story though had been a consultant, computer tech, special agent in the military for drug enforcement and a soldier. This is the type of guy that has many stories, and all so good you could sit and listen to him for hours even if you didn't know him. We hit it off and since then have kept in touch although he and the school parted ways, in a not so friendly way.
Either you have a crush on this guy, or he molested you. Which is it?
For a public company, questions like "Is it cheaper to make non-exploding cars, or deal with lawsuits?" or "is it cheaper to enforce pollution controls or deal with fines?" are valid queries.
These are valid queries for ANY company, of ANY size, public or private. The answer to these queries is and should be the high road. In the long term, businesses that choose ethical decisions win. The costs incured over long-term unethical decisions include complete lack of public trust in your company, investors, and the government. This leads to less customers, more aggressive competitors (who can target you better), and less profits!
The flaw is that most public companies are structured to allow, enforce, and reward short-term decision making. Management is fluid between companies, staying rarely over 10 years at any public company. Middle management stays even shorter. Board members and large shareholders can move freely and readily to somewhere else.
These things have advantages, certainly, but the side effect is that the *responsibility* period becomes shortened. In private companies, its much easier to make decisions, becuase your family, relatives, friends, neighbors who are involved in the company will know / find out in 10 years that you fucked them. In public companies the link isnt as direct, and shareholders dont care as much.
Second -- I agree with you, to some extent. Based on the posters comments, I already assumed he had knowledge of one side- that of the church.
Third -- I was not attempting to fully educate the individual in the beliefs of all practicing members, just point him in the right direction that there IS debate about the church.
Fourth -- What exactly is your point? That I'm an idiot? And you attempt to prove this thesis through documenting that I did not provide a full and complete education on slashdot? What a joke. Get a life.
Not to stray too far from the subject, but your line "most mormons are closer to following the new testament then a great many US Christians" is perhaps one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard.
I think you need some education about what mormonism is and what they really believe in.
Doesnt that seem to be a bit disturbing about all the coal dust? Did you ever wear a mask or have any breathing problems? Man that would fuck me up, but I have asthma.
Being a multiple-venture entrepreneur, with dealings in private equity and VC funding, I can tell you that this sounds good, but really isnt possible for a variety of reasons. I do appreciate your viewpoint, however.
1. "This means if you make money in Europe on the Euro your money might actually be worth more than the dollar at some point." First flaw. The reason the money is worth different amounts in different economies is BECAUSE we dont have a global economy. If you have a true global economy, you have no hedge, becuase money and markets will be fast enough to compensate (within hours) to geographic changes. So, your euro conversion to dollar will never gain you real purchasing power in a true global economy. Although you might still get 2 to 1, the value of a banana will be equivalent given your assumption, so no hedging is possible.
2. "The point is if you are running a business, you'll move to whereever business is and whereever money is." This is true now, given a long enough timeline, so no flaw there. This is the flaw: "You don't have to give to charity when you can buy stock." That sort of goes against true charity. True charity is giving. True and correct stock ownership is just that: ownership. It seems inherently hard to mix giving with ownership. Can i give you a peice of bread telling you to eat, but telling you I own that bread no matter what you do with it? No, I cant. Its illogical. When you give someone something, it becomes theirs. Ownership is given away, thats the point.
3. "Right now most capitalists are just making money to make money, if they actually did give back to their communities we would be in a much better state." This is a nice sentiment, but I think its a little off base on two points. First, capitalists make money to make money, thats the point of being capitalists. Thats how it has always been, and always will be. As soon as you take away that motivation, it really isnt capitalistic thought anymore. But technicalities aside, I actually disagree that society would be better off if we had less capitalists and more "givers". I think there is a place for both. The thing you are missing is that capitalists, THROUGH capitalist endeavors, are giving to society in a very unique and incredibly beneficial way: Jobs. I think you will find that those you might consider the greediest capitalists create more jobs than anyone else. Building large businesses to make me lots of money takes other people.
I think you will find that the most successful societies are ones that assume humans are inherently greedy and selfish. Although I dont believe this to be true for people in general, setting societies rules in this fashion prevent many people from causing problems by being selfish.
4 - "This does not mean giving back through higher taxes, it means giving back by venture capital." I am assuming that you have never had any interaction with venture capital, due to these statements. Venture capital is not giving, in fact its about as far as you can get. Venture capital is often called Vulture capital in the circles I run. It has its place, but its nasty and unfriendly business generally. Venture capitalists are out to take control of ventures, for their private circle of investors' benefit. Aside from this nasty fact about VC that most people dont know, you are still ignoring the fact that most people are inherently risk-averse. People dont want to put their pension funds, or even donate funds, to risky enterprises. High risk ventures have huge payout, sure, but for every 100 that make it big, the other 99 fail or are killed by the VC's prematurely. Most people cant come into line with those type of investments, which is why VC's investors are those companies or individuals who have enough cash to throw around that it fits. This ISNT average middle american denizen.
I certainly appreciate your ability to "think outside the box", but its important to remain grounded in reality at the same time. The key is (from the
Europe - Good luck getting a job! Until you are granted full citizenship, you will be behind EVERYONE who is EU citizen in the line for ANY job. As you said, good luck!
Asia - Sure, China is growing. However, their healthcare, governmental, and longterm economic stability leave MUCH to be desired compared to US or Europe. S. Korea isnt in horrible shape (obviously N. Korea is bad news). Japan has been having real economic and societal problems for the last 20 years (their population base is aging much much faster than the US population, and their kids arent procreating). As you said, good luck!
South America - Sunny! and unstable. The governments are partially corrupt. I hope you have money to bribe your way into a job. Healthcare -- nonexistant. Economic Stability -- Nonexistant. Also, I hope you speak spanish or portuguese fluently. As you said, good luck!
Middle East & Africa - Hrmm. You can figure this one out on your own. Regardless of the instability -- these are not places that are generally considered a step up in terms of "healthiest, most happy, more economically secure" nations, as you mentioned.
The grandparent was correct - things ARENT that bad here, compared to the rest of the world. He was also correct in saying that we can improve here. Try it sometime. I volunteer regularly, donate often to charities, and vote regularly on both local and federal levels. Make things better in your community instead of bitching about "well ill just move!". If you really feel like you will be better off somewhere else, then go do it. At very worst, STOP FUCKING BITCHING.
I think you might, just maybe, be ignoring some other costs. Lets consider:
-Actual Bandwidth costs (this is just an AP) -Installation Costs -Configuration Costs -Wages & Salary for all your people
OR -outsourced tech + billing support costs
Even that alone, you really think its easy to get 1000 people signed up within 3 weeks? That would be lovely, and highly unlikely, especially given the likely range of this thing. You would have to be in tokyo or china to get that type of density.
Oh well. Still kind of cool technology, just pretty worthless in REAL business.
Apparently not you... but a better question might be, why are you acting so defensive? It was merely an observation.
Not defensive -- just commenting. It really does seem irrelevant, to me, what a group of people who dont yet exist might think in the far off future.
How many previous generations enjoyed the availability of non-animal-derived meat?
Well, I think soy has been around for a while. Technically Tofu isnt meat, but it certainly makes for a meat substitute. Regardless -- I think RealMeat will be around for a while.
I know as much (or as little) about the subject as you do, since I'm not an expert on growing meat in a vat. Predicting the future is remarkably difficult, especially when it's not in one's area of expertise. You might be right, or you might end up like the IBM guy who predicted a world market for "maybe as many as six" computers.
Exactly correct, but this WHOLE ARTICLE is about speculation. I'm not doing anymore speculation than anyone else, including yourself with the whole grandkids point. And thats not bad, its called having an opinion. Thats what we are all commenting about. Of course no one knows FOR SURE. The point is, we take our current viewpoint and knowledge of the world, and we comment, trying to add something meaningful (or just silly). Generally we all fail, but occasionally, something cool happens. Welcome to discussion, debate, and opinions.
Grandchildren should look up to their elders, not vice versa. Plus, eating real meat has been in my family for generations -- you really think its going to go away in 2 more? I doubt it.
I can just hear me now: "Back in my day, we didnt have any of this meat-in-a-tank phooey, we had to RAISE our cattle, and KILL the motherfuckers, and COOK IT ourselves! Now get the fuck out of grandpa's way, im going hunting."
Lets be honest, sure they might be able to get away with making average quality beef steaks from this, but it will be a long time until they can have great Foi Gras, Filet Mignons, Salmon, or Sushi Tuna, and you know it. This article is about filler for Taco bell, nothing else.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah your rifle will work real well against an apache attack helicopter.
But hey, maybe you will get lucky!
I completely agree with your post, but surely you must realize that it doesnt work like this anymore.
THe idea before is that there were no significant differences in technology between militia-level tech and army-level tech. Nowawadys, army-level tech is insanely more powerful than anything any individual citizen (hency militia-level) can. Think Helicopter, Tank, Strategic Missile, etc etc.
The only way to win a revolt now is to have the some or all of the army on your side. Otherwise, if it comes to shooting matches, the populace will lose.
So, given that logic, your average rifle or handgun wont really mean much, other than for show. Guess what, we would have to revert to terrorist-like actions and tactics.
B
Hence why I said "here's a hint, its not the CC companies..."
Regardless of what makes marxism simpler, its still a failed concept.
At its base, marxism assumes that society is made up of two distinct, non-mixing classes (a la Owners vs Workers, proletariat vs bourgeoisie). This is a critical flaw, especially when applied to societies like the US, where many begin as one and end as another. This is all aside from the fact that we have more than two classes. At very least, there are five in the US. The unemployed poor, the working poor, the middle, the middle upper, and the elite. The dynamics between these classes are not so simply defined as Marx would prefer.
Simple put, Marx was a hack with a great ability to swing others to his views. His theories are base and elementary and they dont allow real societies to function. Hence the failing / transformations of most communist countries into functional socialism.
Thus preventing 9-11. Thus preventing the nuke-and-meth invasion. The rest of the world has nothing we need. They've got stuff we want, but we could make it all here if we wanted to.
You really think closing our borders to international trade would have prevented 9/11? Please. I dont believe terrorists are that logical in any sense. They need someone to hate. If we closed our borders and didnt use their oil, they would hate us for that. Or they would hate us for not sharing food. Terrorists are not logical people, dont give them such credit.
The Meth invasion?? Dude, how would closing our borders prevent illegal drugs from being manufactured here? Just like during prohibition, a closing of the borders would just improve shady dealings more than they are even today. More thugs, more drug money, more incidental death. Besdies, what do you care if some jackhole wants to kill himself with meth. I certainly dont, as long as I dont get caught in some crossfire of bullets between him and a rival.
Maybe it should. Maybe we should start killing the free traitors.
Whatever that means, Im not sure. Regardless, the whole line about killing anyone arbitrarily just doesnt fly. Who decides? you? Great. Anarchy. Certainly a lot of people decide, but its not any one individuals role to make such decisions quickly and without trial. Nice try, hitler.
Better off how? All I see is MORE poverty, fewer middle class individuals, and a group of rich people who are so scared of protecting their weath that they spend 200 days a year in the Bahammas to avoid US Taxes. That's not better off in my book.
I agree. I'm not saying we are doing that great of a job currently. All I am arguing is that things would be worse given your set of parameters. Do you think all those "People with money" would just stick around and wait for the local isolated economy to tank? Fuck no. They would take their money to Geneva and then the US would be a country full of people without enough money to re-jumpstart it.
Businesses, of any time, require two things: Human Capital and Financial Capital. If the financial capital goes away, you are stuck.
Actually I did. They're gone now- the risk happened to be 100% just like it is with any small business. If you actually do have success, that's when the men come to break your kneecaps and threaten your family.
No. Thats not how it works. This isnt china. I have had numerous small businesses, and no one came to break my kneecaps. Unless you deal in drugs, guns, gambling, or prostitution, I really cant see your situation happening to average business people. It just doesnt happen anymore.
Perhaps its time for some personal responsibility. Isnt it at least remotely possible that the reason you are where you are is because of decisions you made? Sure its convenient to blame the easy targets, but you are in your situation due to your own mistakes. It takes a strong man to admit that hes a failure due to his own mistakes, and an even stronger one to fix it once he has made that realization.
What a load of trash. Marxist Hacker indeed!
Do you have any idea what the implications would be had bush, or any other president, taken your advice?
What you are advocating is isolation, or at best highly restricted free trade. All it does is piss off other countries when you "insured that Americans would have other jobs by closing the borders to imports". Can you think of what they would have done? Closed us off.
Guess what, America lives or dies by its exports. Its exports of services, of entertainment, of culture, of business. It does NOT live or die by its programmers or software development industry.
The choice was made, and it was correct, and its unpleasant that you were on the losing end, but all in all, the country is better for not being isolationist like you seem to prefer.
All you are is mimicing the pissed off "They took our jobs" line that every other self righteous, and subsequently unemployed person uses. Next time, stop bitching, and start working to change your career or start your own business. You had savings, as you said -- you just werent willing to risk them to do your own thing.
I think so, Brain, but if they called them "Sad Meals" then kids wouldnt buy them! ;p
No, they saved their ass. You are, generally, never liable for incorrect charges on your bill. Guess who is liable? Here is a hint, its not the CC companies either...
The reason people sign on the dotted line is so that you cant refute it later. Without that signature, the vendor has no claim to your cash.
Dont kid yourself. Public companies are perhaps the BEST at doing something that will lose the money over the short or long term.
The companies that are best at making money are mid size companies. Hence why they grow into large companies, original management moves out or retires, and corporate stooges step in -- who have no real money invested.
Thats the real problem with big big big public companies -- all the people invested arent anywhere near or have any idea what goes on in said company.
It wouldnt suprise me at all if Google starts feeling the pain on some of these fancy "innovations" they seem to be on about. Right now they are able to fund such nonsense with a immensly hyped stock price and wonderful public relations.
Ahh Yes. Not only did you complete miss the point and counterpoint of all posts involved (mixing them all up), you also managed to post AC while using such wonderful phrases as "fuckin stupid" and "fuckin liberal ideals".
I think someone needs to sit on a sofa and chit chat with a professional before he runs through office/school building with an AK. Or at very worst, post using your account to take some accountability for what you are saying. It really means more when you are willing to stand behind your points instead of hide like a little AC bitch.
Im not assuming the GP is a man, you are. In what sense does commenting on his language make me homophobic? Im simple pointing out what it seems to be -- more than just friends. I have plenty of gay friends, and they would likely agree with my comments about the GP. You inferred that because I was asking that I was making some judgement. Think again.
Hrmm.
I was in highschool a few years ago when I met on of the most respected men in my life. He came to the school in the form of a "nice" Bofh. Living in a small town I was the only person I knew at school that used linux, until that year when I met my two geek friends. The one I'm talking of in this story though had been a consultant, computer tech, special agent in the military for drug enforcement and a soldier. This is the type of guy that has many stories, and all so good you could sit and listen to him for hours even if you didn't know him. We hit it off and since then have kept in touch although he and the school parted ways, in a not so friendly way.
Either you have a crush on this guy, or he molested you. Which is it?
Obviously the fedex you use isnt the same on I (used to) use.
For a public company, questions like "Is it cheaper to make non-exploding cars, or deal with lawsuits?" or "is it cheaper to enforce pollution controls or deal with fines?" are valid queries.
These are valid queries for ANY company, of ANY size, public or private. The answer to these queries is and should be the high road. In the long term, businesses that choose ethical decisions win. The costs incured over long-term unethical decisions include complete lack of public trust in your company, investors, and the government. This leads to less customers, more aggressive competitors (who can target you better), and less profits!
The flaw is that most public companies are structured to allow, enforce, and reward short-term decision making. Management is fluid between companies, staying rarely over 10 years at any public company. Middle management stays even shorter. Board members and large shareholders can move freely and readily to somewhere else.
These things have advantages, certainly, but the side effect is that the *responsibility* period becomes shortened. In private companies, its much easier to make decisions, becuase your family, relatives, friends, neighbors who are involved in the company will know / find out in 10 years that you fucked them. In public companies the link isnt as direct, and shareholders dont care as much.
First -- Settle down.
Second -- I agree with you, to some extent. Based on the posters comments, I already assumed he had knowledge of one side- that of the church.
Third -- I was not attempting to fully educate the individual in the beliefs of all practicing members, just point him in the right direction that there IS debate about the church.
Fourth -- What exactly is your point? That I'm an idiot? And you attempt to prove this thesis through documenting that I did not provide a full and complete education on slashdot? What a joke. Get a life.
Not to stray too far from the subject, but your line "most mormons are closer to following the new testament then a great many US Christians" is perhaps one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard.
I think you need some education about what mormonism is and what they really believe in.
Your education begins here: http://www.exmormon.org/
Learn. I generally hate to make sweeping statements about any group of people, but mormons are quite fucked up.
Doesnt that seem to be a bit disturbing about all the coal dust? Did you ever wear a mask or have any breathing problems? Man that would fuck me up, but I have asthma.
Why smoke when you can work in a coal plant!
I think about 4% of the /. population get what you are talking about. I am part of that 4%. ;p
Being a multiple-venture entrepreneur, with dealings in private equity and VC funding, I can tell you that this sounds good, but really isnt possible for a variety of reasons. I do appreciate your viewpoint, however.
1. "This means if you make money in Europe on the Euro your money might actually be worth more than the dollar at some point." First flaw. The reason the money is worth different amounts in different economies is BECAUSE we dont have a global economy. If you have a true global economy, you have no hedge, becuase money and markets will be fast enough to compensate (within hours) to geographic changes. So, your euro conversion to dollar will never gain you real purchasing power in a true global economy. Although you might still get 2 to 1, the value of a banana will be equivalent given your assumption, so no hedging is possible.
2. "The point is if you are running a business, you'll move to whereever business is and whereever money is." This is true now, given a long enough timeline, so no flaw there. This is the flaw: "You don't have to give to charity when you can buy stock." That sort of goes against true charity. True charity is giving. True and correct stock ownership is just that: ownership. It seems inherently hard to mix giving with ownership. Can i give you a peice of bread telling you to eat, but telling you I own that bread no matter what you do with it? No, I cant. Its illogical. When you give someone something, it becomes theirs. Ownership is given away, thats the point.
3. "Right now most capitalists are just making money to make money, if they actually did give back to their communities we would be in a much better state." This is a nice sentiment, but I think its a little off base on two points. First, capitalists make money to make money, thats the point of being capitalists. Thats how it has always been, and always will be. As soon as you take away that motivation, it really isnt capitalistic thought anymore. But technicalities aside, I actually disagree that society would be better off if we had less capitalists and more "givers". I think there is a place for both. The thing you are missing is that capitalists, THROUGH capitalist endeavors, are giving to society in a very unique and incredibly beneficial way: Jobs. I think you will find that those you might consider the greediest capitalists create more jobs than anyone else. Building large businesses to make me lots of money takes other people.
I think you will find that the most successful societies are ones that assume humans are inherently greedy and selfish. Although I dont believe this to be true for people in general, setting societies rules in this fashion prevent many people from causing problems by being selfish.
4 - "This does not mean giving back through higher taxes, it means giving back by venture capital." I am assuming that you have never had any interaction with venture capital, due to these statements. Venture capital is not giving, in fact its about as far as you can get. Venture capital is often called Vulture capital in the circles I run. It has its place, but its nasty and unfriendly business generally. Venture capitalists are out to take control of ventures, for their private circle of investors' benefit. Aside from this nasty fact about VC that most people dont know, you are still ignoring the fact that most people are inherently risk-averse. People dont want to put their pension funds, or even donate funds, to risky enterprises. High risk ventures have huge payout, sure, but for every 100 that make it big, the other 99 fail or are killed by the VC's prematurely. Most people cant come into line with those type of investments, which is why VC's investors are those companies or individuals who have enough cash to throw around that it fits. This ISNT average middle american denizen.
I certainly appreciate your ability to "think outside the box", but its important to remain grounded in reality at the same time. The key is (from the
Hrmm. Im curious where you will go?
Europe - Good luck getting a job! Until you are granted full citizenship, you will be behind EVERYONE who is EU citizen in the line for ANY job. As you said, good luck!
Asia - Sure, China is growing. However, their healthcare, governmental, and longterm economic stability leave MUCH to be desired compared to US or Europe. S. Korea isnt in horrible shape (obviously N. Korea is bad news). Japan has been having real economic and societal problems for the last 20 years (their population base is aging much much faster than the US population, and their kids arent procreating). As you said, good luck!
South America - Sunny! and unstable. The governments are partially corrupt. I hope you have money to bribe your way into a job. Healthcare -- nonexistant. Economic Stability -- Nonexistant. Also, I hope you speak spanish or portuguese fluently. As you said, good luck!
Middle East & Africa - Hrmm. You can figure this one out on your own. Regardless of the instability -- these are not places that are generally considered a step up in terms of "healthiest, most happy, more economically secure" nations, as you mentioned.
The grandparent was correct - things ARENT that bad here, compared to the rest of the world. He was also correct in saying that we can improve here. Try it sometime. I volunteer regularly, donate often to charities, and vote regularly on both local and federal levels. Make things better in your community instead of bitching about "well ill just move!". If you really feel like you will be better off somewhere else, then go do it. At very worst, STOP FUCKING BITCHING.
I think you might, just maybe, be ignoring some other costs. Lets consider:
-Actual Bandwidth costs (this is just an AP)
-Installation Costs
-Configuration Costs
-Wages & Salary for all your people
OR
-outsourced tech + billing support costs
Even that alone, you really think its easy to get 1000 people signed up within 3 weeks? That would be lovely, and highly unlikely, especially given the likely range of this thing. You would have to be in tokyo or china to get that type of density.
Oh well. Still kind of cool technology, just pretty worthless in REAL business.
Apparently not you... but a better question might be, why are you acting so defensive? It was merely an observation.
Not defensive -- just commenting. It really does seem irrelevant, to me, what a group of people who dont yet exist might think in the far off future.
How many previous generations enjoyed the availability of non-animal-derived meat?
Well, I think soy has been around for a while. Technically Tofu isnt meat, but it certainly makes for a meat substitute. Regardless -- I think RealMeat will be around for a while.
I know as much (or as little) about the subject as you do, since I'm not an expert on growing meat in a vat. Predicting the future is remarkably difficult, especially when it's not in one's area of expertise. You might be right, or you might end up like the IBM guy who predicted a world market for "maybe as many as six" computers.
Exactly correct, but this WHOLE ARTICLE is about speculation. I'm not doing anymore speculation than anyone else, including yourself with the whole grandkids point. And thats not bad, its called having an opinion. Thats what we are all commenting about. Of course no one knows FOR SURE. The point is, we take our current viewpoint and knowledge of the world, and we comment, trying to add something meaningful (or just silly). Generally we all fail, but occasionally, something cool happens. Welcome to discussion, debate, and opinions.
Hes not MY friend... You brought him along! ;p
Who the fuck careswhat my grandkids think?
Grandchildren should look up to their elders, not vice versa. Plus, eating real meat has been in my family for generations -- you really think its going to go away in 2 more? I doubt it.
I can just hear me now:
"Back in my day, we didnt have any of this meat-in-a-tank phooey, we had to RAISE our cattle, and KILL the motherfuckers, and COOK IT ourselves! Now get the fuck out of grandpa's way, im going hunting."
Lets be honest, sure they might be able to get away with making average quality beef steaks from this, but it will be a long time until they can have great Foi Gras, Filet Mignons, Salmon, or Sushi Tuna, and you know it. This article is about filler for Taco bell, nothing else.
Bah -- Kia puts their prices on their websites, just like every other car vendor. Sure, its not a GREAT price, but its still a price.
Not listing your prices online is bad. The reason people are looking at the website is that they dont WANT to call.