It is literally not possible for you to have noticed that the idea is popular without seeing other arguments for the practice. Therefore you are either an oblivious idiot or a troll. I know which one I'm betting on, but just in case you're an oblivious idiot: real property cannot be perfectly copied. When real property is stolen, the original owner no longer has it. When people say music is 'stolen', they actually mean 'copied'. If you could generate a perfect copy of a piece of property that a friend owns, such as a car, and then drive away in the copy while your friend drives away in the original, would it be wrong to do so? Sure, it might put the auto industry out of business, but there's nothing that says any particular industry is guaranteed to exist and grow forever. How many steam ship companies exist today? How many farriers? How many blacksmiths? How many outhouse salesmen? Some of all of the above, I would imagine, but nothing like the numbers in which they once existed (potentially excluding outhouse salesmen; I'm not sure how many of those there ever were). There, now you've heard at least one other argument.
Well, it really isn't smart to bite the heads off chickens and such. So I see no logical contradiction. From Dictionary.com: Geek: a carnival performer who performs sensationally morbid or disgusting acts, as biting off the head of a live chicken.
Blind people complaining that Wagner's line of polychromatic satin finish paints are not 'accessible' to them... Deaf people complaining that wind chimes aren't 'accessible' to them...
So sue me. *This *is* legal advice. However, that doesn't mean it's GOOD advice or that you should take it. Maybe you should take some responsibility for yourself instead of always looking for someone else to pin the blame on. "Waa, waa, the man I don't know gave me bad legal advice over the internet!" **the preceeding note was not necessarily intended for the anonymous pussy who replied, but for the same audience as his note.
I appreciate it, but I can't take the credit. I am copying someone else's idea, because I thought it was a really good one. I really wish I had heard about it when I was 18, but I didn't. Oh well, that's life.:)
Yes, there's always an alternative. But that alternative's not always reasonable. Your alternative, while commendable, takes a lot of planning and time.
Yes, my alternative takes planning. However, any reasonable retirement plan does. If you don't have a retirement plan, you're not going to enjoy your old age. Life takes planning and work to live well. That's just the way it is.
Oh yeah, re work weeks actually being 60-80 hours: I didn't include the commute. It really was just 40 hours in my calculation, so you are being rather silly.
Because you would commute without having to work? Why wouldn't you include the commute? That's being silly.
Re logical fallacy: I wasn't giving you a proof, but if you're going to say that >90% of the working force in the U.S. is being stupid you'd better have something unarguably better. And it's flat-out ridiculous to counsel everyone against working full-time; there's no reasonable alternative for most.
Doesn't 90 percent of the US population have trouble finding large countries on globes? Aren't the majority of Americans now overweight? HOW many people vote for American Idol? Are you actually arguing for the intelligence of the masses? As for no alternative, sure there is. There's always an alternative. It just depends upon your priorities.
You spend about a third of your life sleeping, and that's not really living your life, so everyone loses by that definition.
Not unless you pair it with another third (or more!) of work. Then you get less than 1/3 of your life to...live.
And who are you, anyway, if you're not working 40 hours a week? I'm guessing either clueless teenager (who will end up working 40 hours a week) or arrogant rich snob (who either worked >40 hours a week in the past to get there, or his ancestors did). Am I right?
Nope. Wrong on both counts. I'm just an average computer guy. I also currently spend about 50 hours a week commuting and working. I currently also lose at life. However, I am pursuing a future of independent living: building up my savings in order to be able to work for myself in a few years. And by work, I mean grow food on a large spread I will be able to pay cash for relatively soon. I understand that growing your own food *is* work. However, it's much less than 1/3 of the day every day (for just my family). I will supplement my income with outside work, but not on a daily (or even weekly) basis. I would much rather that I had begun preparing for this earlier, but them's the breaks. Now, I realize that most people don't want to grow their own food and fend for themselves. That's ok, too. You can plan for retirement early and, if you stick to it, you'll still have more than half your life to be retired and not even have to grow your own food. Or, you can live paycheck to paycheck until you're 70 and then retire, hoping that social security's still around. Your choice.
Um, no. If the sum total was 40 hours, MAYBE. But you are not including the commute, getting ready, staying late, working through lunch, etc. 60-80 workweeks are also common. Still, if you are spending over 1/3 of your life doing something that isn't living your life, you lose. Your argument uses a common logical fallacy, as well. Your mother probably called you on it when you were young. If everyone else who works at least 40 hours a week jumped off a bridge, would you jump off a bridge? Would you call someone counseling against jumping off the bridge silly? Remember, "everyone" eats unhealthily and doesn't excercise. Do you want to advance the argument that popularity equals superiority?
All of your assumptions place work at the head of the priority list. Rather than trying to find extra time outside of work to spend with your spouse, you should rather find a job which takes up less of your time. That is what I meant. If you are spending that large a portion of your life at work, you lose at life. Do you understand, now?
Only if the device has no default configuration, which you didn't mention. Of course, there's a reason that most devices do come with a default config. If they simply had no default config, it'd be difficult to crack them anyway. If you have to set everything up manually, you're more likely to change the password. Those who are unlikely to change default passwords are also unlikely to be configuring the machine.
anything besides changing the password cannot be done using the default password.
How does this solve anything? The crax0r just logs in with the default, changes it to whatever he/she wants, then re-logs with the new password. Problem, er, solved? I think not. Hey, good effort, though, and the requiring local access for administration is a good idea. (At least as a default.)
Well, you have to understand that I agree with you. Posts from those who hold similar views to mine do tend to seem thoughtful and intelligent to me. Besides, content doesn't have much to do with it. You could write thoughtful, intelligent posts that were completely wrong.:)
Well, anarchists wouldn't want strong state interference in the market either....just sayin'.:) I am mildly anarchist, but I would accept our original system of government. I'm just not so big on the oligarchy. Especially when it's a criminal syndicate that's running things.
I thought I stated that I am basically an anarcho-capitalist, although that may have been another thread or board. If I hadn't, I've now done so.:) I certainly wouldn't call myself an economic libertarian!
It would be incorrect to say that I've never said anything moronic, but I do hope that my moronic statements are few and far between.
I do agree that there is a lot of confusion concerning political terms (limited for the sake of the discussion, we could likely go for days finding 'X terms' that are misused). Of course, the farther you move toward either 'wing' of the political spectrum, the more difficult it gets to differentiate between the ideologies.
I've really enjoyed reading this thread. Thank you for making thoughtful, intelligent posts. We could use more of those on this particular website.:)
Because the term libertarian is older than it's modern usage
Yes, I understand that. So are a lot of other terms, and yet we generally prefer to use modern terms in modern times. Maybe not you, but most of us do. I know it sounds bitchy, but I'm not intending it that way.
He said he had a 26.4k connection, not a 28.8k modem. Many times, especially in the sticks, a "56.6k" modem will deliver only 26k. This is because of line quality, which is independent of the particular modem you choose. The parent you replied to said the same thing.
Slashdot Mirror
It is literally not possible for you to have noticed that the idea is popular without seeing other arguments for the practice. Therefore you are either an oblivious idiot or a troll. I know which one I'm betting on, but just in case you're an oblivious idiot: real property cannot be perfectly copied. When real property is stolen, the original owner no longer has it. When people say music is 'stolen', they actually mean 'copied'. If you could generate a perfect copy of a piece of property that a friend owns, such as a car, and then drive away in the copy while your friend drives away in the original, would it be wrong to do so? Sure, it might put the auto industry out of business, but there's nothing that says any particular industry is guaranteed to exist and grow forever. How many steam ship companies exist today? How many farriers? How many blacksmiths? How many outhouse salesmen? Some of all of the above, I would imagine, but nothing like the numbers in which they once existed (potentially excluding outhouse salesmen; I'm not sure how many of those there ever were). There, now you've heard at least one other argument.
we need to create an incentive structure that is best for society.
Honestly curious here: Why? What on Earth dictates this?
Well, it really isn't smart to bite the heads off chickens and such. So I see no logical contradiction.
From Dictionary.com:
Geek:
a carnival performer who performs sensationally morbid or disgusting acts, as biting off the head of a live chicken.
I urge you to stop urging people to do things.
Blind people complaining that Wagner's line of polychromatic satin finish paints are not 'accessible' to them...
Deaf people complaining that wind chimes aren't 'accessible' to them...
Would those have worked better?
Armless people are suing casinos because the slot machines aren't 'accessible' to them.
So sue me.
*This *is* legal advice. However, that doesn't mean it's GOOD advice or that you should take it. Maybe you should take some responsibility for yourself instead of always looking for someone else to pin the blame on. "Waa, waa, the man I don't know gave me bad legal advice over the internet!"
**the preceeding note was not necessarily intended for the anonymous pussy who replied, but for the same audience as his note.
I wholly endorse your correction. Wish I'd said it that way.
In a government job? It would go pretty much like that.
Malice gets you fired, while stupidity gets excused and forgiven. Which would you prefer your actions to be seen as?
I appreciate it, but I can't take the credit. I am copying someone else's idea, because I thought it was a really good one. I really wish I had heard about it when I was 18, but I didn't. Oh well, that's life. :)
Yes, there's always an alternative. But that alternative's not always reasonable. Your alternative, while commendable, takes a lot of planning and time.
Yes, my alternative takes planning. However, any reasonable retirement plan does. If you don't have a retirement plan, you're not going to enjoy your old age. Life takes planning and work to live well. That's just the way it is.
Oh yeah, re work weeks actually being 60-80 hours: I didn't include the commute. It really was just 40 hours in my calculation, so you are being rather silly.
Because you would commute without having to work? Why wouldn't you include the commute? That's being silly.
Re logical fallacy: I wasn't giving you a proof, but if you're going to say that >90% of the working force in the U.S. is being stupid you'd better have something unarguably better. And it's flat-out ridiculous to counsel everyone against working full-time; there's no reasonable alternative for most.
Doesn't 90 percent of the US population have trouble finding large countries on globes? Aren't the majority of Americans now overweight? HOW many people vote for American Idol? Are you actually arguing for the intelligence of the masses?
As for no alternative, sure there is. There's always an alternative. It just depends upon your priorities.
You spend about a third of your life sleeping, and that's not really living your life, so everyone loses by that definition.
Not unless you pair it with another third (or more!) of work. Then you get less than 1/3 of your life to...live.
And who are you, anyway, if you're not working 40 hours a week? I'm guessing either clueless teenager (who will end up working 40 hours a week) or arrogant rich snob (who either worked >40 hours a week in the past to get there, or his ancestors did). Am I right?
Nope. Wrong on both counts. I'm just an average computer guy. I also currently spend about 50 hours a week commuting and working. I currently also lose at life. However, I am pursuing a future of independent living: building up my savings in order to be able to work for myself in a few years. And by work, I mean grow food on a large spread I will be able to pay cash for relatively soon. I understand that growing your own food *is* work. However, it's much less than 1/3 of the day every day (for just my family). I will supplement my income with outside work, but not on a daily (or even weekly) basis. I would much rather that I had begun preparing for this earlier, but them's the breaks. Now, I realize that most people don't want to grow their own food and fend for themselves. That's ok, too. You can plan for retirement early and, if you stick to it, you'll still have more than half your life to be retired and not even have to grow your own food. Or, you can live paycheck to paycheck until you're 70 and then retire, hoping that social security's still around. Your choice.
Um, no. If the sum total was 40 hours, MAYBE. But you are not including the commute, getting ready, staying late, working through lunch, etc. 60-80 workweeks are also common. Still, if you are spending over 1/3 of your life doing something that isn't living your life, you lose. Your argument uses a common logical fallacy, as well. Your mother probably called you on it when you were young. If everyone else who works at least 40 hours a week jumped off a bridge, would you jump off a bridge? Would you call someone counseling against jumping off the bridge silly? Remember, "everyone" eats unhealthily and doesn't excercise. Do you want to advance the argument that popularity equals superiority?
All of your assumptions place work at the head of the priority list. Rather than trying to find extra time outside of work to spend with your spouse, you should rather find a job which takes up less of your time. That is what I meant. If you are spending that large a portion of your life at work, you lose at life. Do you understand, now?
In the course of your life, you will spend more time at work than will spend with your spouse
If this is true for "you", then "you" are not doing it right. "You" lose at life.
Only if the device has no default configuration, which you didn't mention. Of course, there's a reason that most devices do come with a default config. If they simply had no default config, it'd be difficult to crack them anyway. If you have to set everything up manually, you're more likely to change the password. Those who are unlikely to change default passwords are also unlikely to be configuring the machine.
anything besides changing the password cannot be done using the default password.
How does this solve anything? The crax0r just logs in with the default, changes it to whatever he/she wants, then re-logs with the new password. Problem, er, solved? I think not. Hey, good effort, though, and the requiring local access for administration is a good idea. (At least as a default.)
Well, you have to understand that I agree with you. Posts from those who hold similar views to mine do tend to seem thoughtful and intelligent to me. Besides, content doesn't have much to do with it. You could write thoughtful, intelligent posts that were completely wrong. :)
Well, anarchists wouldn't want strong state interference in the market either....just sayin'. :)
I am mildly anarchist, but I would accept our original system of government. I'm just not so big on the oligarchy. Especially when it's a criminal syndicate that's running things.
I thought I stated that I am basically an anarcho-capitalist, although that may have been another thread or board. If I hadn't, I've now done so. :) I certainly wouldn't call myself an economic libertarian!
:)
It would be incorrect to say that I've never said anything moronic, but I do hope that my moronic statements are few and far between.
I do agree that there is a lot of confusion concerning political terms (limited for the sake of the discussion, we could likely go for days finding 'X terms' that are misused). Of course, the farther you move toward either 'wing' of the political spectrum, the more difficult it gets to differentiate between the ideologies.
I've really enjoyed reading this thread. Thank you for making thoughtful, intelligent posts. We could use more of those on this particular website.
You must be bored at work. I really hope so, anyway. :)
I know *I* am.
Because the term libertarian is older than it's modern usage
Yes, I understand that. So are a lot of other terms, and yet we generally prefer to use modern terms in modern times. Maybe not you, but most of us do. I know it sounds bitchy, but I'm not intending it that way.
He said he had a 26.4k connection, not a 28.8k modem. Many times, especially in the sticks, a "56.6k" modem will deliver only 26k. This is because of line quality, which is independent of the particular modem you choose. The parent you replied to said the same thing.
Very nice Laumer reference in the .sig.
He's one of the (if not the) best.
The Monitors is genius.