And at what point does the parent rain brimstone upon the child, or turn it into salt, or drown it in 40 days of rain? Is that when the child doesn't clean their room for a whole week?
The human race no longer measures success by number of progeny. If that were the case, the ghetto is full of incredibly successful and genetically diverse people.
Also, how would you know how many children I have? You don't even know who I am. Go on with the defensive behavior, though. It fits on you like a lovely tailored cocktail dress.
You're right. Damn these people who keep putting features into software, reusing component code from open source projects, and generally trying to move us forward. Obviously what people really want is the satisfying feel of using a computer like it was still 1976.
Why is it that people get so defensive about the fact that they have sex? I mean, congratulations, dude. You've managed to complete your default bodily programming. You win. I guess.
Yes, everything should be done your way. Heaven forbid features other people find useful worm their way into your software, since you are obviously the anonymous arbiter of all that is technology.
(and it doesn't mean they have to end UP Jewish, but raisin' em so ain't asking much).
That's a lot to ask. Forcing children to believe in imaginary bullshit to keep them in line is approximately the most evil thing the human race has to offer. The nice part is that we wrap it up in virtue. Tricksy.
I empathize with vegetables a lot more, ever since brother Maynard opened my ears to the cries of the carrots. I will not participate in their holocaust.
The PS1 was utter shit for about two years, and the Sony brand wasn't exactly top of the line in home gaming. The PS2 was heavily supply constrained (yay buzzword) for quite some time after launch. I submit that you, sir, have a few memories that you may be repressing in the console "war."
That said, you're all a bunch of babies whining about your favorite console. It's unbelievably entertaining to watch.
Considering the whole list is one giant opinion, and your only real argument in favor of your position is that you personally disagree, I'd say troll is appropriate.
Because your message is one of fear. You've got to learn to express things differently because fear only works if you have the might to back things up.
If bits are bits, then why do people care so very much about obtaining specific sequences of them? It's not the bits that are important, it's what they encode. Good luck convincing someone there's an exploitable market in something people wouldn't be willing to buy, only download free.
It's not strictly a money thing. 15% of a public corporation is enough to have significant influence over the way it runs, without having absolute control. It's just idle daydreaming, I guess - it would be fairly impossible to implement.
I can think of objections, but they're fairly generic, and mostly related to the economic problems inherent in confiscatory policy.
After a little bit of thought along these lines, I wonder if a mandatory ceding of 10-15% of the shares in public corporations over a size limit (maybe as you proposed, maybe a little smaller) to a public trust would be a workable idea. Not directly related, I know, and it brings in massive issues in the management of such a trust, but it would have interesting effects on the running of such entities.
Good plan. What's the threshold. Who gets to enforce it? I assume you have a system worked out already, with nice little corners for your pet causes nowhere to be seen, right?
The reason that was included in the summary was to elide the all too frustrating thread of Constitutional "scholars" arguing defensively about how XM is violating rights.
Slashdot Mirror
And at what point does the parent rain brimstone upon the child, or turn it into salt, or drown it in 40 days of rain? Is that when the child doesn't clean their room for a whole week?
The human race no longer measures success by number of progeny. If that were the case, the ghetto is full of incredibly successful and genetically diverse people.
Also, how would you know how many children I have? You don't even know who I am. Go on with the defensive behavior, though. It fits on you like a lovely tailored cocktail dress.
You're right. Damn these people who keep putting features into software, reusing component code from open source projects, and generally trying to move us forward. Obviously what people really want is the satisfying feel of using a computer like it was still 1976.
Why is it that people get so defensive about the fact that they have sex? I mean, congratulations, dude. You've managed to complete your default bodily programming. You win. I guess.
Yes, everything should be done your way. Heaven forbid features other people find useful worm their way into your software, since you are obviously the anonymous arbiter of all that is technology.
Anyone with brains knows that consoles will never defeat PC's
Actually, anyone with a brain knows it isn't a war.
You'd think that would be the obvious answer. Technology for technology's sake doesn't really fly outside of geek circles.
Don't get so snippy just because he forgot to enumerate making a delicious dinner and birthing babies.
I think it might be this part:
(and it doesn't mean they have to end UP Jewish, but raisin' em so ain't asking much).
That's a lot to ask. Forcing children to believe in imaginary bullshit to keep them in line is approximately the most evil thing the human race has to offer. The nice part is that we wrap it up in virtue. Tricksy.
Damn dude, relax. Your hero will live to fight another day even with this assault on his personal messiah complex.
I empathize with vegetables a lot more, ever since brother Maynard opened my ears to the cries of the carrots. I will not participate in their holocaust.
We're not all in this together, because your top priorities aren't everyone's. Until you realize that, you have lost.
The PS1 was utter shit for about two years, and the Sony brand wasn't exactly top of the line in home gaming. The PS2 was heavily supply constrained (yay buzzword) for quite some time after launch. I submit that you, sir, have a few memories that you may be repressing in the console "war."
That said, you're all a bunch of babies whining about your favorite console. It's unbelievably entertaining to watch.
And in the US, the rights to use those airwaves are sold by "The People" to other people, who then have exclusive access to them.
PROTIP: telling half the story in an attempt to hide the portion that doesn't back up your position is no different than lying.
Then you'll have to take the people out of science as well, since politics could be summed up as "what happens when two or more people talk."
Considering the whole list is one giant opinion, and your only real argument in favor of your position is that you personally disagree, I'd say troll is appropriate.
Because your message is one of fear. You've got to learn to express things differently because fear only works if you have the might to back things up.
(Not you specifically.)
I'd blame Sylar. But it would really be Peter.
And you're clinging to a legal definition that suits you, even if it happens to not be true in the real world.
If bits are bits, then why do people care so very much about obtaining specific sequences of them? It's not the bits that are important, it's what they encode. Good luck convincing someone there's an exploitable market in something people wouldn't be willing to buy, only download free.
No one ever got rich serving the geek market, so don't wait for a big company to care.
It's not strictly a money thing. 15% of a public corporation is enough to have significant influence over the way it runs, without having absolute control. It's just idle daydreaming, I guess - it would be fairly impossible to implement.
I can think of objections, but they're fairly generic, and mostly related to the economic problems inherent in confiscatory policy.
After a little bit of thought along these lines, I wonder if a mandatory ceding of 10-15% of the shares in public corporations over a size limit (maybe as you proposed, maybe a little smaller) to a public trust would be a workable idea. Not directly related, I know, and it brings in massive issues in the management of such a trust, but it would have interesting effects on the running of such entities.
Good plan. What's the threshold. Who gets to enforce it? I assume you have a system worked out already, with nice little corners for your pet causes nowhere to be seen, right?
The reason that was included in the summary was to elide the all too frustrating thread of Constitutional "scholars" arguing defensively about how XM is violating rights.