Products have different prices for society/the economy as a whole and the end-consumer. The cost of pollution (which leads directly to costly anti-pollution measures, degrades food-ouput/quality, heightens chance of costly natural disasters ), usage of common goods (how much did it cost to build that roid you're using?) isn't taken into the account for the end-pricing for the consumer, but nonetheless it's the consumer that ends up paying for it.
Either we have to make these hidden costs direct and start taxing heavily for pollution (you wreak it, you pay for it!)(e.g. Kyoto protocal with tradable permissions) or we need to ditch the principle of capitalism/economic feasibility overall, because the current situation just ain't cutting it! No matter if you believe the doomsdaysayers or not, there isn't any doubt we are harming the environment. The disagreement is just one of scale, and even if the optimists are right our current system is a pretty bad one!
[troll]And by doing something you mean giving these four kids money?
That is on par with the logic of starving a hundred thousand iraqui children to death through sanctions and not giving a flying f*ck, while the same happening to one braindead woman causes the whole country to stop.[/troll]
Doctors have removed Terry Schiavo's feeding tube.
Again, please point out the bias there. If it's biased, you will probably be able to find a group of people who disagree with the bias and who say it's not true. Go for it!
The bias comes from the choice of words. Somebody might argue that the words 'feeding tube' are laden, and misrepresenting because she's not actually eating through it. They might f.x. claim 'nutrional device' should be used as to not cause negative assosiations to the act itself.
Mildly embarrasing yes.
It's not my first language though, and I still hold that I'm better at it than a surprisingly large amount of Americans.
Of course, the vast majority of you have twice my vocabulary and far better grasp of grammars. It's just the few very bad apples that sours the harvest so extremely.
First of all watch your mouth. Your spreading of hate is not welcome.
After having read a whole thread full of random UN bashing having nothing to do with the agencies that would have gotten this responsbility, I find this comment mildly ironic.
For the record:
I have absolutly no opinion of the matter at hand; however the internet seem to be working remarkably fine as at is. It's just that very few people in the start of this thread (all the people who didn't read the article) didn't seem to have much of an opinion either. That didn't stop them from posting though, and neither from getting modded up.
For a crash course in why I'm fed up with Americans on the net, compare the European and American World of Warcrafts forums. One of them is full of people bitching, putting eachother down and generally being ignorant bastards. The other is not.
not that hard a word is it? The british manage to spell it, all my norwegian friends manage to spell it, just about every but you bloody Americans manage to spell it! Take a bloody crash-course in spelling will you? Please?
Generic reply to what I've read in this thread so far
1. I don't ****ing care if you think the UN is run by imcompetent fools! How about, in the future, you americans get the first 10 posts to complain about the UN, moderate them up, and the rest of can actually try writing something in the thread without being bogged millions of you sprouting bollocks?
2. References to Darfur, Rwanda and other places I have neither heard of nor can spell are not welcome at all. We all know there are problems in the world the UN are unable to solve. BIG ****ING SURPRISE!
3. References to Oil for Food are not welcome at all either. Guess who imposed the ridicules sanctions in the first place?
4. References to Chinese being bogey-men are moderatly unwelcome too. We've heard it before, and unless you can actually dig up some references to the specific guy, you're just sprouting prejudiced grap! We aren't close-minded racists are we? right?
5. References to them being corrupt bastards are moderatly unwelcome too. Watched any big newstories about money missing from Iraq lately? Followed up on the reports on what really happended in the latest UN scandals? No?
Seriously, you guys..
GET THE **** OF MY INTERNET!
The basic premise of supply and demand is, and has always been, been one of distribution to those who can afford. Which by inference, means not distributing to those who cannot. It's a fairly harsh principle. If you can't handle it, good for you, but it's nothing new, and certainly doesn't make this newspeak
Furthermore, considering his views on 'laws of supply and demand'; Giving away something freely certainly ruins the balance between supply and demand! Just like public roads hampers the balance between cars and trains, like the police hampers the balance between security firms and public. By definition, anything the government does hampers the laws of supply and demand. Some we all accept as good things, others we disagree about.
Lastly, the notion of giving away something for 'free', like healthcare, broadband, access to public road and this case operating systems is quite more common among the more leftist of us, than the right-wing people. In my book, the comment about this being leftist is certainly correct.
Neither Communist nor leftist are swear-words you know:) They have pretty distinct meanings.
Because letting them claim something as 'reduced version' for removing the very thing they are getting smacked for putting in there in the first place would be kinda silly wouldn't it?
In the end, I think it pretty much boils down to a matter of caring. As a non-native english speaker I'm always very concious of my own writing, especially when writing anything I consider remotely important. As a result, I think I end up writing quite decent english.
I am however quite sure that everybody could do this if they just got into the mindset of actually thinking about what they write when writing it.
For some reason I envision a maximum security prison in Sweden being more like a college dorm than a prison.
I have never heard of anybody getting raped in a norwegian prison, nor have I ever heard about anybody being beaten up without anybody caring. Nor have, in fact, ever heard any bad prison stories being told.
Clean prisons are what seperates us from the savages.
It's a common proverb, you ought to know the context
You own a house?.. The land it is on was most gotten by somebody saying 'this land is now my property' and thus taking it from the previous owners everybody/nobody. The lumber ultimatly came from somebody saying 'this forest is now mine', the electricity/power came from nature. Agreed, somebody used effort to put it together, but that doesn't means it any less of a theft.
As for the intellectual rights, another poster already explained where the theft came in. Granting a monopoly on use of specific knowledge, regardless of how others came upen the knowledge (patentlaws apply to eremits in caves too!) can't be viewed as anything other than theft.
It's not like I believe this has any relevance to the real world, however I do believe that it's a wise thing to remember. Property is a human concept, and atleast to the extent we see today a fairly new one at that (middle ages still had group-ownerships as 'family property, 'village property' and everybody slept in the same bed:) ). There is nothing natural to it. We still have, and will always have, the ability to choose how form our society.
I will also assume you are European, in which case I should ask you why Europeans aren't jumping up and down to lower taxes and remove bans on certain speech (such as the ban on Nazi material).
Because the wast majority in Europe believe banning Nazism and having high taxes are good things.
The problem is that there will always be rebellious youth, and very of them really manage to comprehend the massive scale of WW2. We don't want Nazisms to be 'just another form to rebell against your parents'. We want it dead and gone, and we want the people claiming they are nazis to be shown for what they are.
Regarding taxes, the pushes for tax-cuts seems to come from the elite-right, and most the mass demonstration from the common man concern protecting rights like healthcare, pensions and labour laws etc. If anything, I'd say there is a far greater likelyhood of a rebellion concerned with increasing taxes than lowering them:)
That's not the same as saying ugly women walking in circles around trees have the right to not be stalked.
I believe most people recognise the right 'not to be stalked', along the same notes most people would sue the telephone company if they started recording/giving out to strangers your telephone conversations. Why is e-mail any different?
You're assuming that any kind of Right to Privacy exists online. And you are very wrong.
Online isn't some magic place where suddenly normal laws are abolished. These are actual companies running services for actual customers. Snooping is bad however way you look at it.
On that note, our differences are probably c'ultural, some countries actually have privacy laws which are generally followed:)
fundamental rights of freedom and choice, because in both cases, the theft is ignoring the original choice and intentions of the copyright holder.
It's all a matter of mindset, and you're not listening
He is basically arguing that some things fundamentally belong to everyone/no-one, and that no-one has any rights to them. There are countless of examples of this I'm sure you'd agree to; the air being most prevailant of these I'd guess.
Wether or not you think music / intellectual property / business method-patents / patents on mathematical methods can be lumped into this category is up to you, but if you're going to argue against him, referring to the rights of the copyright-holder isn't cutting it, as he(and a lot of others) ain't recognising those rights to begin with.
Property is by nature theft, albeit also, sadly enough, a necessity. Applying it to "intellectual property" (limiting other people's right to intellect) isn't, atleast in my world, a necessity at all.
In Italy, the one with the most expansive car looses the most:).. when everybody is a freeking maniac, you just can't count on people chickening out anymore
I've got a slight feeling the reason they don't have any of those 'last person to brake while racing toward a cliff' is because everybody who tried died after about one try.
Slashdot Mirror
Products have different prices for society/the economy as a whole and the end-consumer. The cost of pollution (which leads directly to costly anti-pollution measures, degrades food-ouput/quality, heightens chance of costly natural disasters ), usage of common goods (how much did it cost to build that roid you're using?) isn't taken into the account for the end-pricing for the consumer, but nonetheless it's the consumer that ends up paying for it.
Either we have to make these hidden costs direct and start taxing heavily for pollution (you wreak it, you pay for it!)(e.g. Kyoto protocal with tradable permissions) or we need to ditch the principle of capitalism/economic feasibility overall, because the current situation just ain't cutting it! No matter if you believe the doomsdaysayers or not, there isn't any doubt we are harming the environment. The disagreement is just one of scale, and even if the optimists are right our current system is a pretty bad one!
Oh, with who exactly?
Cool, new caster class?
Must be from 3.rd edition, haven't played that one yet.
[troll]And by doing something you mean giving these four kids money?
That is on par with the logic of starving a hundred thousand iraqui children to death through sanctions and not giving a flying f*ck, while the same happening to one braindead woman causes the whole country to stop.[/troll]
I know =)
Just venting, too bad I can't blame on 'my period' though, with me being male and all..
In that I'm rightfully getting modded flaimbait / offtopic.
Again, please point out the bias there. If it's biased, you will probably be able to find a group of people who disagree with the bias and who say it's not true. Go for it!
The bias comes from the choice of words. Somebody might argue that the words 'feeding tube' are laden, and misrepresenting because she's not actually eating through it. They might f.x. claim 'nutrional device' should be used as to not cause negative assosiations to the act itself.
It's not my first language though, and I still hold that I'm better at it than a surprisingly large amount of Americans.
Of course, the vast majority of you have twice my vocabulary and far better grasp of grammars. It's just the few very bad apples that sours the harvest so extremely.
Ahh.. but when was he a minister, and why did he quit?
And why was he shipped out of country?
I certainly did't know, and I sincerly doubt any of the posters posting about this did either.
After having read a whole thread full of random UN bashing having nothing to do with the agencies that would have gotten this responsbility, I find this comment mildly ironic.
For the record:
I have absolutly no opinion of the matter at hand; however the internet seem to be working remarkably fine as at is. It's just that very few people in the start of this thread (all the people who didn't read the article) didn't seem to have much of an opinion either. That didn't stop them from posting though, and neither from getting modded up.
Yes, it does.. Why conceal it?
For a crash course in why I'm fed up with Americans on the net, compare the European and American World of Warcrafts forums. One of them is full of people bitching, putting eachother down and generally being ignorant bastards. The other is not.
not that hard a word is it? The british manage to spell it, all my norwegian friends manage to spell it, just about every but you bloody Americans manage to spell it! Take a bloody crash-course in spelling will you? Please?
1. I don't ****ing care if you think the UN is run by imcompetent fools! How about, in the future, you americans get the first 10 posts to complain about the UN, moderate them up, and the rest of can actually try writing something in the thread without being bogged millions of you sprouting bollocks?
2. References to Darfur, Rwanda and other places I have neither heard of nor can spell are not welcome at all. We all know there are problems in the world the UN are unable to solve. BIG ****ING SURPRISE!
3. References to Oil for Food are not welcome at all either. Guess who imposed the ridicules sanctions in the first place?
4. References to Chinese being bogey-men are moderatly unwelcome too. We've heard it before, and unless you can actually dig up some references to the specific guy, you're just sprouting prejudiced grap! We aren't close-minded racists are we? right?
5. References to them being corrupt bastards are moderatly unwelcome too. Watched any big newstories about money missing from Iraq lately? Followed up on the reports on what really happended in the latest UN scandals? No?
Seriously, you guys..
GET THE **** OF MY INTERNET!
Why is this newspeak?
Every word he says rings true in my ears.
The basic premise of supply and demand is, and has always been, been one of distribution to those who can afford. Which by inference, means not distributing to those who cannot. It's a fairly harsh principle. If you can't handle it, good for you, but it's nothing new, and certainly doesn't make this newspeak
Furthermore, considering his views on 'laws of supply and demand'; Giving away something freely certainly ruins the balance between supply and demand! Just like public roads hampers the balance between cars and trains, like the police hampers the balance between security firms and public. By definition, anything the government does hampers the laws of supply and demand. Some we all accept as good things, others we disagree about.
Lastly, the notion of giving away something for 'free', like healthcare, broadband, access to public road and this case operating systems is quite more common among the more leftist of us, than the right-wing people. In my book, the comment about this being leftist is certainly correct.
Neither Communist nor leftist are swear-words you know :) They have pretty distinct meanings.
Because letting them claim something as 'reduced version' for removing the very thing they are getting smacked for putting in there in the first place would be kinda silly wouldn't it?
I am however quite sure that everybody could do this if they just got into the mindset of actually thinking about what they write when writing it.
I'd still say it was the best RPG of the year, which means:
1. That game was bloody great. 2. The competetion sucked.
The manufacturer releasing the best product, ahead of the competitors tend to win?
No shit! ... and in other news, people with loads of money tend to be rich, and people with very little money tend to be poor.
I have never heard of anybody getting raped in a norwegian prison, nor have I ever heard about anybody being beaten up without anybody caring. Nor have, in fact, ever heard any bad prison stories being told.
Clean prisons are what seperates us from the savages.
It's a common proverb, you ought to know the context
You own a house? .. The land it is on was most gotten by somebody saying 'this land is now my property' and thus taking it from the previous owners everybody/nobody. The lumber ultimatly came from somebody saying 'this forest is now mine', the electricity/power came from nature. Agreed, somebody used effort to put it together, but that doesn't means it any less of a theft.
As for the intellectual rights, another poster already explained where the theft came in. Granting a monopoly on use of specific knowledge, regardless of how others came upen the knowledge (patentlaws apply to eremits in caves too!) can't be viewed as anything other than theft.
It's not like I believe this has any relevance to the real world, however I do believe that it's a wise thing to remember. Property is a human concept, and atleast to the extent we see today a fairly new one at that (middle ages still had group-ownerships as 'family property, 'village property' and everybody slept in the same bed :) ). There is nothing natural to it. We still have, and will always have, the ability to choose how form our society.
Because the wast majority in Europe believe banning Nazism and having high taxes are good things.
The problem is that there will always be rebellious youth, and very of them really manage to comprehend the massive scale of WW2. We don't want Nazisms to be 'just another form to rebell against your parents'. We want it dead and gone, and we want the people claiming they are nazis to be shown for what they are.
Regarding taxes, the pushes for tax-cuts seems to come from the elite-right, and most the mass demonstration from the common man concern protecting rights like healthcare, pensions and labour laws etc. If anything, I'd say there is a far greater likelyhood of a rebellion concerned with increasing taxes than lowering them :)
I believe most people recognise the right 'not to be stalked', along the same notes most people would sue the telephone company if they started recording/giving out to strangers your telephone conversations. Why is e-mail any different?
You're assuming that any kind of Right to Privacy exists online. And you are very wrong.
Online isn't some magic place where suddenly normal laws are abolished. These are actual companies running services for actual customers. Snooping is bad however way you look at it.
On that note, our differences are probably c'ultural, some countries actually have privacy laws which are generally followed :)
It's all a matter of mindset, and you're not listening
He is basically arguing that some things fundamentally belong to everyone/no-one, and that no-one has any rights to them. There are countless of examples of this I'm sure you'd agree to; the air being most prevailant of these I'd guess.
Wether or not you think music / intellectual property / business method-patents / patents on mathematical methods can be lumped into this category is up to you, but if you're going to argue against him, referring to the rights of the copyright-holder isn't cutting it, as he(and a lot of others) ain't recognising those rights to begin with.
Property is by nature theft, albeit also, sadly enough, a necessity. Applying it to "intellectual property" (limiting other people's right to intellect) isn't, atleast in my world, a necessity at all.
All the English dictionaries that matter mayhap, there are others out there too though.
In Italy, the one with the most expansive car looses the most :) .. when everybody is a freeking maniac, you just can't count on people chickening out anymore
I've got a slight feeling the reason they don't have any of those 'last person to brake while racing toward a cliff' is because everybody who tried died after about one try.