What a terrible point. Google and Facebook are for these rules, but they are lousy with user data, so therefore the telecom industry has traditionally responsibly self-governed their market and can be trusted to continue to do so? That's your point?
Google and Facebook have nothing to do with my point that the telecom industry moves to market monopolies (historically and for good reason) in an industry in which the products and services make it tantalizingly easy to engage in anti-competitive behavior.
Hell, given that Google and Facebook are far less regulated than companies in the telecom industry, they're pretty good examples of companies which might benefit from being forced to act in manners you deem more responsible. Your argument reads more like a pro-regulation argument than anti.
Fortunately, the telecom industry has a rich history of operating as a healthy open, transparent market. Your hope is well placed and you seem to be very familiar with how the industry has acted and operated in the past.
The UN observers, US Secretary of Defense and the joint chiefs of staff are satisfied that Iran is following the terms of the agreement. You're so desperate to believe that Iran is doing stuff in secret, *somehow*, that it becomes an easy chip to play for political gain for Trump. It's almost too easy.
And you don't have that right, legally speaking, anywhere on earth. You can choose to end your life in certain places if you meet a fairly strict set of criteria that those societies have agreed on. People can also make mistakes when trying to end their lives, and society bears the cost of taking care of these people flight for no other natural reason than human compassion (but also often whatever social safety nets exist where it happens.) You're trying to make a case by saying that it's a right simply because you say it is, and deliberately oversimplifying details that belie your position that humans can kill themselves and affect nobody in doing so.
It costs money to throw your body out. You cannot make killing yourself impact nothing. You live in the world with other people. I don't consider your attitude particularly adult.
People are not islands. They have dependants, friends, family, etc. They can pass on desease. They can land on other people. Cleaning up bodies costs money and has an emotional cost. Societies cannot and should not be expected to bear the full cost of people who take very bad risks. This notion that people make choices for self in isolation is wishful thinking and over simplification. Part of the function of a society is to set limits on what those risks are.
The United States is a capitalist economy with a free market.
It has free markets that are a regulated. Saying otherwise doesn't make it so. Try dealing with the world the way it is, not the super simple world you wish it was (for no other reason than you're emtionally incapable of handling it.)
If they paid a living wage, your bill would be 15% more. So just pay the 15% more. You're punishing the employee for a situation that isn't is his or her power to change over an amount of money you'd claim you'd pay anyways were it part of their salary. It doesn't paint your reasoning as having anyone's interests other than your own in mind.
Chefs get paid more. Many places just share the tip totals anyhow. No system is perfect, but you're trying to reason with the world the way you think it should be, not the way it is. That's something most people mature out of at some point.
Just eat some pasta, or don't eat some pasta. Unless you're eating pasta three times a day, and nothing else, who the fuck cares. Have some pasta. Have some fruit. Have some vegetables. Have some meat. Don't eat garbage, and don't eat one and only one thing.
Your should read the news then. The reported news isn't that there is a trade war. It's that there is fear and talk of trade war. You need to ignore this nuance to make the point you wish you could make.
Automated doesn't mean "get replaced by an android". It just means that you'll need less people to do the same work due to advances in automation. Your robot may not clean the whole house, but it will let house cleaners clean a house faster, with less people. It's certainly easy to just say that we don't have the technology now, but in 20 years given advancements in robotics and automation... I'd put my money on the human not doing the brunt of the work in cleaning a house.
These data breaches are bad, but I'm sick and tired of everyone giving away completely unnecessary information!
Nobody is asking you to feel sorry for people. That doesn't mean you have to be okay with companies being incompetent at handling consumer data. Yikes dude, sounds like somebody wants to live in the fantasy of a just world, where everything happens because people deserve it, and we never have to care about anything.
You say that as if it's a minor thing. Financial markets exist, and they are heavily regulated with lots of oversight. On occasion they fail, can be subject to (legal to illegal) manipulation, can host bad actors, but that's a far cry from "it's all the same shit".
You would vote for a guy because he showed the wherewithal to build a steam rocket and survive it? This is your job interview for political representation?
I share their distrust of government, and particularly the people who buy our government and set its laws and policies.
I've yet to see anyone make a decent case of how guns would be a useful and/or effective means of remedying that. If poop hits the wall, it's not the guns that tear the state down, it's the millions of people storming the gates, guns or no guns. A far more plausible scenario for the states, *if* a large enough group of armed citizens took over the government would be an equally shitty junta - and if they couldn't take over but were sizable enough, I doubt they'd be any less shitty than the dozens of other 'people's army' rebel groups that mar the history books and countries of today.
Your best weapon against a shitty government is education, birth control, and a well informed and intentioned populace.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it's also the problem of his or her children, family, etc. I'm not arguing one way or the other, but people do not exist in vacuums.
What a terrible point. Google and Facebook are for these rules, but they are lousy with user data, so therefore the telecom industry has traditionally responsibly self-governed their market and can be trusted to continue to do so? That's your point?
Google and Facebook have nothing to do with my point that the telecom industry moves to market monopolies (historically and for good reason) in an industry in which the products and services make it tantalizingly easy to engage in anti-competitive behavior.
Hell, given that Google and Facebook are far less regulated than companies in the telecom industry, they're pretty good examples of companies which might benefit from being forced to act in manners you deem more responsible. Your argument reads more like a pro-regulation argument than anti.
Fortunately, the telecom industry has a rich history of operating as a healthy open, transparent market. Your hope is well placed and you seem to be very familiar with how the industry has acted and operated in the past.
*rolls eyes*
It's almost impressive how many wrong things you can cram into one post.
The UN observers, US Secretary of Defense and the joint chiefs of staff are satisfied that Iran is following the terms of the agreement. You're so desperate to believe that Iran is doing stuff in secret, *somehow*, that it becomes an easy chip to play for political gain for Trump. It's almost too easy.
And you don't have that right, legally speaking, anywhere on earth. You can choose to end your life in certain places if you meet a fairly strict set of criteria that those societies have agreed on. People can also make mistakes when trying to end their lives, and society bears the cost of taking care of these people flight for no other natural reason than human compassion (but also often whatever social safety nets exist where it happens.) You're trying to make a case by saying that it's a right simply because you say it is, and deliberately oversimplifying details that belie your position that humans can kill themselves and affect nobody in doing so.
It costs money to throw your body out. You cannot make killing yourself impact nothing. You live in the world with other people. I don't consider your attitude particularly adult.
People are not islands. They have dependants, friends, family, etc. They can pass on desease. They can land on other people. Cleaning up bodies costs money and has an emotional cost. Societies cannot and should not be expected to bear the full cost of people who take very bad risks. This notion that people make choices for self in isolation is wishful thinking and over simplification. Part of the function of a society is to set limits on what those risks are.
Fortunately, the world is rather Darwinian.
No it isn't. This is a monumentally stupid thing to be believe, right up there with believing in a just world.
Trump is actually the cleanest and the most honest of the bunch.
This is weaponized stupidity.
The United States is a capitalist economy with a free market.
It has free markets that are a regulated. Saying otherwise doesn't make it so. Try dealing with the world the way it is, not the super simple world you wish it was (for no other reason than you're emtionally incapable of handling it.)
If they paid a living wage, your bill would be 15% more. So just pay the 15% more. You're punishing the employee for a situation that isn't is his or her power to change over an amount of money you'd claim you'd pay anyways were it part of their salary. It doesn't paint your reasoning as having anyone's interests other than your own in mind.
Chefs get paid more. Many places just share the tip totals anyhow. No system is perfect, but you're trying to reason with the world the way you think it should be, not the way it is. That's something most people mature out of at some point.
Just eat some pasta, or don't eat some pasta. Unless you're eating pasta three times a day, and nothing else, who the fuck cares. Have some pasta. Have some fruit. Have some vegetables. Have some meat. Don't eat garbage, and don't eat one and only one thing.
Your should read the news then. The reported news isn't that there is a trade war. It's that there is fear and talk of trade war. You need to ignore this nuance to make the point you wish you could make.
Automated doesn't mean "get replaced by an android". It just means that you'll need less people to do the same work due to advances in automation. Your robot may not clean the whole house, but it will let house cleaners clean a house faster, with less people. It's certainly easy to just say that we don't have the technology now, but in 20 years given advancements in robotics and automation ... I'd put my money on the human not doing the brunt of the work in cleaning a house.
The bus was late this morning! It's a terrorist bus! Oh no, it's raining! These are terrorist clouds! Etc ..
Trains go at "you're dead if you hit it" speeds 6" from concrete walls all the time. Man, I feel like you've never been on a train.
These data breaches are bad, but I'm sick and tired of everyone giving away completely unnecessary information!
Nobody is asking you to feel sorry for people. That doesn't mean you have to be okay with companies being incompetent at handling consumer data. Yikes dude, sounds like somebody wants to live in the fantasy of a just world, where everything happens because people deserve it, and we never have to care about anything.
"Other than widespread acceptance of the NYSE?"
You say that as if it's a minor thing. Financial markets exist, and they are heavily regulated with lots of oversight. On occasion they fail, can be subject to (legal to illegal) manipulation, can host bad actors, but that's a far cry from "it's all the same shit".
It's pretty easy to doctor video these days. I rather doubt it happened.
You would vote for a guy because he showed the wherewithal to build a steam rocket and survive it? This is your job interview for political representation?
Most 61 year olds' biggest concern is an enlarged prostate and their blood sugar levels.
That's about as American-centric as an assertion as you can get.
Hey, he embodies the American spirit. The human spirit, really, in which your dreams are more important than reality.
I share their distrust of government, and particularly the people who buy our government and set its laws and policies.
I've yet to see anyone make a decent case of how guns would be a useful and/or effective means of remedying that. If poop hits the wall, it's not the guns that tear the state down, it's the millions of people storming the gates, guns or no guns. A far more plausible scenario for the states, *if* a large enough group of armed citizens took over the government would be an equally shitty junta - and if they couldn't take over but were sizable enough, I doubt they'd be any less shitty than the dozens of other 'people's army' rebel groups that mar the history books and countries of today.
Your best weapon against a shitty government is education, birth control, and a well informed and intentioned populace.
Basically everyone.