Considering the rapid movement of the tech industry, doesn't 18 YEARS seem like a fairly significant time to stop anyone else from using your innovation as a foundation for further innovation?
Also "innovate their way around" is one of the craziest phrases I've ever read. We're happy to waste creative energy on getting around artificial restrictions now rather than simply creating?
From memory a GP hull effectively stopped time for everything inside itself for the duration of any collision. Thereby ensuring that *nothing* happened to the occupants.
Ikea, in Holland, gives you a 5% discount if you order with IE. Of course I'm not going to fire up Windows to order from Ikea! So, I simply "lie" and take 5% off.
Seriously? That is really freakin weird. Got any (english) links? Not disputing, just curious.
I know mine sure stumbled over "rdpadily". But more to the point I had to look at each individual word in that sentence and not just the whole sentence as I normally would.
An unregulated market (derivatives) resulted in a bubble that popped, and we're all shocked and reeling and looking for excuses like a we've just been hit with something novel and amazing.
Boss: Wait, but if you're using this "linux" how will you use outlook? Me: I'll be running windows in a VM Boss: So it'll make.. Me:..No difference Boss:... So why would I care?
One great example could be the USA. There you have the more liberal areas and people. And the (from my pov!) religious fanatics. They could both live happy, if they just had their own countries. And why the hell not? They could still work together in areas that they both agree on or need each other for.
Isolationist
That's why I oppose something like big countries and world governments: Because, if you disagree, there is no place you could go to anymore. Before I realized this, I thought, a world government where everything is peaceful, would be an ideal. In theory: Yes. In reality, there is no such thing, as long as there is evolution.
Libertarian
I'd say I'm being trolled because I'm silly enough to respond to your mess. I imagine you disagree but I'm more annoyed at myself really.
What we must realize, is that, no matter how disgusting and strange the views of others look to us... we have no right so tell them what to do.
And
One great example could be the USA. There you have the more liberal areas and people. And the (from my pov!) religious fanatics. They could both live happy, if they just had their own countries. And why the hell not? They could still work together in areas that they both agree on or need each other for.
That's why I oppose something like big countries and world governments: Because, if you disagree, there is no place you could go to anymore. Before I realized this, I thought, a world government where everything is peaceful, would be an ideal. In theory: Yes. In reality, there is no such thing, as long as there is evolution.
Just because he says he doesn't believe in a universal truth apparently doesn't stop him from spouting one.
yerch, and here come the isolationist libertarians, trotting out their ideology as if they've realised some perfect universal order that no one else gets.
First, the word "evolution" is a very bad one to use as a justification, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant something more akin to "progress".
The illusion, that we can do without conflicts (which sometimes end in wars), comes from the illusion that there is one global truth, when in reality, everything is relative.
And just under it
What we must realize, is that, no matter how disgusting and strange the views of others look to us... we have no right so tell them what to do.
So "all opinions are relative and there is no universal truth" and that statement is a universal truth that must be acknowledged and accepted.
Cultural relativity can only extend so far, and a group where it is "accepted to rape everybody you see, and then eat him" is far beyond that if for no other reason than the passive acceptance of such practices is as much a choice and changes your own group in the same way as choosing to combat those practices would.
Diverse groups may be more prone to argue within themselves, but they are less subject to the extreme conflict that arises between polar opposites in the form of states.
Give me the snarky '08 election over the neverending conflict faced by Israel, the american civil war over the second world war, the war for independence over the crusades.
Solid system, some bad loans bring the whole thing crashing down.
Do some reading jackass, bad loans don't make a bubble, false economies do. Such as the unregulated derivatives market which Warren Buffet called a "financial weapon of mass destruction"
Slashdot Mirror
Considering the rapid movement of the tech industry, doesn't 18 YEARS seem like a fairly significant time to stop anyone else from using your innovation as a foundation for further innovation?
Also "innovate their way around" is one of the craziest phrases I've ever read. We're happy to waste creative energy on getting around artificial restrictions now rather than simply creating?
or option 3. He would agree to if everyone else in his country also did.
And oh, well, look at that, that's what happened.
Ah yes, but the people with guns were given permission to do so by the voting public. So get the fuck over it already you goddamn misers.
Haha, well if any animal can survive and thrive despite the harshest odds...
Eeek.
HELP, VSU, as well as "Academics" being the primary targets in his culture wars.
Howard knew damn well where disagreement with his extremism was most likely to present itself.
Once upon a time this was the role that educational institutions vaguely resembled.
Unfortunately such entities are "inefficient" and "bureaucratic".
Ach! Foiled again! Cheers :-)
Sure but good luck making middle management
From memory a GP hull effectively stopped time for everything inside itself for the duration of any collision. Thereby ensuring that *nothing* happened to the occupants.
Seriously? That is really freakin weird. Got any (english) links? Not disputing, just curious.
I know mine sure stumbled over "rdpadily". But more to the point I had to look at each individual word in that sentence and not just the whole sentence as I normally would.
Replied because I hit the wrong button on moderation and needed to cancel it.
For the record I was aiming for "Funny"
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't even Smith acknowledge necessary intervention in markets for situations such as monopolies?
I thought the current prevailing ideology was more of a modern one ala Milton Friedman?
Exactly.
An unregulated market (derivatives) resulted in a bubble that popped, and we're all shocked and reeling and looking for excuses like a we've just been hit with something novel and amazing.
Absolutely.
Boss: Wait, but if you're using this "linux" how will you use outlook? ..No difference ... So why would I care?
Me: I'll be running windows in a VM
Boss: So it'll make..
Me:
Boss:
Empirical evidence says less death and lower spending.
Fine, you've got me on semantics. When saying "Isolationist" I should have said "non-interventionist".
I'd call it picky but you are right.
Interestingly the wiki also identifies non-interventionism with the libertarian movement.
Isolationist
Libertarian
I'd say I'm being trolled because I'm silly enough to respond to your mess. I imagine you disagree but I'm more annoyed at myself really.
And
Just because he says he doesn't believe in a universal truth apparently doesn't stop him from spouting one.
Just trolled by another foul-mouthed AC I guess.
yerch, and here come the isolationist libertarians, trotting out their ideology as if they've realised some perfect universal order that no one else gets.
First, the word "evolution" is a very bad one to use as a justification, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant something more akin to "progress".
And just under it
So "all opinions are relative and there is no universal truth" and that statement is a universal truth that must be acknowledged and accepted.
Cultural relativity can only extend so far, and a group where it is "accepted to rape everybody you see, and then eat him" is far beyond that if for no other reason than the passive acceptance of such practices is as much a choice and changes your own group in the same way as choosing to combat those practices would.
Diverse groups may be more prone to argue within themselves, but they are less subject to the extreme conflict that arises between polar opposites in the form of states.
Give me the snarky '08 election over the neverending conflict faced by Israel, the american civil war over the second world war, the war for independence over the crusades.
Too Long; Did Not Read
Solid system, some bad loans bring the whole thing crashing down.
Do some reading jackass, bad loans don't make a bubble, false economies do. Such as the unregulated derivatives market which Warren Buffet called a "financial weapon of mass destruction"
So THAT's the problem with my business model of "you should give me money", those damn people!
Clearly, the model is perfect and it's the people who are the problem.
Oh for the love of god don't let management hear about THAT little scam of ours ;-)