I certainly agree that the experience isn't unique. I won't work for large corporations because of the terrible experiences I've had. What I came to realize is that I need to stay a little closer to the entrepreneurial spirit that keeps this country running, stick with smaller companies, and try to keep myself as independent as possible.
The US isn't run by the federal government. It's run by the people who get the government elected.
Considering the small parts of the government I've experienced as a contractor, I think a strong case could be made to say no one is running things at all.
You're really missing my point. I don't serve either side. I loathe both.
You're delusional if you think the Democratic National Congress has any interest in 'the people.' They serve the same master as the Republicans - power.
And by the way, I didn't say I see it as a game. I said the politicians are playing a game. I also strongly implied (and am now directly stating) that you are a willing pawn.
So far as suspecting I live in a fantasy world - how would you know anything about me? You've ignored the things about me I've told you directly. Do you think your power of assumption is that strong?
Wow, you must had a bad experience somewhere (maybe a few somewheres).
Sorry to hear things didn't work out for you the way you wanted. Still, the hyperbole is a little over the top in your post. What you said applies to a lot of places, but not all by far. That's the free market at work, you know. Employees generally get a choice where to be employed (unless they're useless, of course.)
I'm kind of assuming you'd rather have the government mandate some form of working conditions that are acceptable to you, so you could just sort of slide into a place and be comfortable. Am I far off base?
I'm not defending Republicans. I can't stand them or the Democrats. I just laugh at how the game is played, and how people get so caught up in the details when the truth of the complicity is so obvious. I can see the evidence of it right in your post. You're so caught up in the game it's like you can't even see it's being played.
Yeah, go on believing that while you serve the same masters from the other side of the aisle. Go on believing there are significant differences because you like some detail or another better. Please, continue to be fooled that it's only the Republicans that are the problem.
I'd like to believe that to be true, but I've seen it too often. And frankly, the moment there is a single issue in the world too serious to laugh about, count me out of the whole game.
My post talks about being modded down. By rule, it gets modded up. This one should be modded down, however, I just screwed system by talking about both directions. It will probably be ignored.
I'd be interested to hear how. I certainly see parallels between Bush and Nixon, but only the coverup aspects ofd Watergate bear any similarity in my eyes. For that matter, so do Clinton's prevarications regarding his oral habits. I think it's superficial, which is to say, there really aren't any applicable lessons that can be learned.
Or as we in the US say: "only an insecure weenie would bother debunking a simple colloquialism being used in a humorous manner in a Slashdot post to put some weird points on an imaginary international scoreboard in a game that no one in the US is even interested in playing."
You were modded "-1, Didn't Worship Democrats," but I think your post is fantastic. I don't get mod points anymore, but if I had them I would flip one your way.
That story doesn't demonstrate any link directly, it merely insinuates one. This is a common journalistic technique used to promote opinions without publishing non-factual information (since the latter is actionable while the former is not). It does mention that the Commerce Department had a hand in the rejection, so I'll give half credit (even though that was not the question). Anything else?
Perhaps he chose to post AC because anything that goes against groupthink is inevitably modded down? Typically as Troll (Slashdot definition: I disagree with your opinion) or Flamebait (Slashdot definition: I disagree with your opinion)
I have a question for all you Slashdotters jumping to the defense of the poor convicted criminal: Suppose this was Ken Lay refusing to give up DNA. Would you jump to his defense as quickly? I'm asking an honest question here, because I think what most of you are doing is identifying with this criminal because of the computer connection. Since a lot of you have expressed a dislike for corporation and their employees, I'm curious to see if a sizeable number of you have the courage of your convictions. No pun intended.
Dr. Peter Venkman: Alice, I'm going to ask you a couple of standard questions, okay? Have you or any of your family been diagnosed schizophrenic? Mentally incompetant? Librarian Alice: My uncle thought he was Saint Jerome. Dr. Peter Venkman: I'd call that a big yes. Uh, are you habitually using drugs? Stimulants? Alcohol? Librarian Alice: No. Dr. Peter Venkman: No, no. Just asking. Are you, Alice, menstruating right now? Man at Library: What's has that got to do with it? Dr. Peter Venkman: Back off, man. I'm a scientist.
I really like the slope you're sliding down. I guess the most interesting facet of it to me is that the crux of the story is nothing even remotely new, and your nightmare scenario hasn't even come close to happening. I suppose that won't change your beliefs, but I know better than to try and counter paranoia with rationality anyway.
Nobody stated the particular presumption that you set up as a strawman. You knocked it down well, however. Too bad it made no real point. You should be a politician, the technique is popular in that set.
The truth it, the vast majority of people that have been convicted are guilty. There are some that slip through the system in both directions, because nothing humans do can be perfect. Unfortunately, there's no way short of letting all the criminals out to guarantee that no innocents are jailed. Is it a price worth paying? Society says yes. My opinion is left as an exercise for the reader.
Given your tendency to commit logical fallacies in your statements, I have serious doubts about the state of your opinions.
It seems you're asserting there aren't thousands of people running scams using computers. Perhaps you feel that anyone using computers is inately honest? Or perhaps you took it personally for some unknown reason? I am insanely curious at to your reasoning.
The virtual console has the added bonus of not infringing on copyright. That makes it better to me. Probably makes it worse to the 'entertainment wants to be free' crowd, though.
Apparently, you don't notice the opinions that are in agreement with yours. It's a fairly common pathology, so it's nothing to be worry about. This site is such a complete left wing feedback loop that anything right of center stands out dramatically. That's why you think the prevailing opinions on this site are right wing.
I actually don't think it matters. People who don't know any better aren't going to make much use of anything that excites physicists anyway. Who cares what gets the masses all riled up?
Slashdot Mirror
I certainly agree that the experience isn't unique. I won't work for large corporations because of the terrible experiences I've had. What I came to realize is that I need to stay a little closer to the entrepreneurial spirit that keeps this country running, stick with smaller companies, and try to keep myself as independent as possible.
The US isn't run by the federal government. It's run by the people who get the government elected.
Considering the small parts of the government I've experienced as a contractor, I think a strong case could be made to say no one is running things at all.
You're really missing my point. I don't serve either side. I loathe both.
You're delusional if you think the Democratic National Congress has any interest in 'the people.' They serve the same master as the Republicans - power.
And by the way, I didn't say I see it as a game. I said the politicians are playing a game. I also strongly implied (and am now directly stating) that you are a willing pawn.
So far as suspecting I live in a fantasy world - how would you know anything about me? You've ignored the things about me I've told you directly. Do you think your power of assumption is that strong?
Wow, you must had a bad experience somewhere (maybe a few somewheres).
Sorry to hear things didn't work out for you the way you wanted. Still, the hyperbole is a little over the top in your post. What you said applies to a lot of places, but not all by far. That's the free market at work, you know. Employees generally get a choice where to be employed (unless they're useless, of course.)
I'm kind of assuming you'd rather have the government mandate some form of working conditions that are acceptable to you, so you could just sort of slide into a place and be comfortable. Am I far off base?
I'm not defending Republicans. I can't stand them or the Democrats. I just laugh at how the game is played, and how people get so caught up in the details when the truth of the complicity is so obvious. I can see the evidence of it right in your post. You're so caught up in the game it's like you can't even see it's being played.
Work on your smooth pimp game, round up a stable of hos, and watch the money roll in with a modicum of effort.
Sure, pimpin ain't easy, but that don't make it hard.
Yeah, go on believing that while you serve the same masters from the other side of the aisle. Go on believing there are significant differences because you like some detail or another better. Please, continue to be fooled that it's only the Republicans that are the problem.
I'd like to believe that to be true, but I've seen it too often. And frankly, the moment there is a single issue in the world too serious to laugh about, count me out of the whole game.
My post talks about being modded down. By rule, it gets modded up. This one should be modded down, however, I just screwed system by talking about both directions. It will probably be ignored.
I'd be interested to hear how. I certainly see parallels between Bush and Nixon, but only the coverup aspects ofd Watergate bear any similarity in my eyes. For that matter, so do Clinton's prevarications regarding his oral habits. I think it's superficial, which is to say, there really aren't any applicable lessons that can be learned.
Or as we in the US say: "only an insecure weenie would bother debunking a simple colloquialism being used in a humorous manner in a Slashdot post to put some weird points on an imaginary international scoreboard in a game that no one in the US is even interested in playing."
You were modded "-1, Didn't Worship Democrats," but I think your post is fantastic. I don't get mod points anymore, but if I had them I would flip one your way.
That story doesn't demonstrate any link directly, it merely insinuates one. This is a common journalistic technique used to promote opinions without publishing non-factual information (since the latter is actionable while the former is not). It does mention that the Commerce Department had a hand in the rejection, so I'll give half credit (even though that was not the question). Anything else?
Don't play politician and give the answer to the question you wanted me to ask. That won't work on me.
Perhaps he chose to post AC because anything that goes against groupthink is inevitably modded down? Typically as Troll (Slashdot definition: I disagree with your opinion) or Flamebait (Slashdot definition: I disagree with your opinion)
I have a question for all you Slashdotters jumping to the defense of the poor convicted criminal: Suppose this was Ken Lay refusing to give up DNA. Would you jump to his defense as quickly? I'm asking an honest question here, because I think what most of you are doing is identifying with this criminal because of the computer connection. Since a lot of you have expressed a dislike for corporation and their employees, I'm curious to see if a sizeable number of you have the courage of your convictions. No pun intended.
You skipped the best one!
Dr. Peter Venkman: Alice, I'm going to ask you a couple of standard questions, okay? Have you or any of your family been diagnosed schizophrenic? Mentally incompetant?
Librarian Alice: My uncle thought he was Saint Jerome.
Dr. Peter Venkman: I'd call that a big yes. Uh, are you habitually using drugs? Stimulants? Alcohol?
Librarian Alice: No.
Dr. Peter Venkman: No, no. Just asking. Are you, Alice, menstruating right now?
Man at Library: What's has that got to do with it?
Dr. Peter Venkman: Back off, man. I'm a scientist.
I really like the slope you're sliding down. I guess the most interesting facet of it to me is that the crux of the story is nothing even remotely new, and your nightmare scenario hasn't even come close to happening. I suppose that won't change your beliefs, but I know better than to try and counter paranoia with rationality anyway.
Nobody stated the particular presumption that you set up as a strawman. You knocked it down well, however. Too bad it made no real point. You should be a politician, the technique is popular in that set.
The truth it, the vast majority of people that have been convicted are guilty. There are some that slip through the system in both directions, because nothing humans do can be perfect. Unfortunately, there's no way short of letting all the criminals out to guarantee that no innocents are jailed. Is it a price worth paying? Society says yes. My opinion is left as an exercise for the reader.
Given your tendency to commit logical fallacies in your statements, I have serious doubts about the state of your opinions.
Sorry, I wasn't sure if the subject line was too subtle. I wasn't being serious.
Do you have any evidence refuting these allegations?
It seems you're asserting there aren't thousands of people running scams using computers. Perhaps you feel that anyone using computers is inately honest? Or perhaps you took it personally for some unknown reason? I am insanely curious at to your reasoning.
The virtual console has the added bonus of not infringing on copyright. That makes it better to me. Probably makes it worse to the 'entertainment wants to be free' crowd, though.
Apparently, you don't notice the opinions that are in agreement with yours. It's a fairly common pathology, so it's nothing to be worry about. This site is such a complete left wing feedback loop that anything right of center stands out dramatically. That's why you think the prevailing opinions on this site are right wing.
Just say the magic words: 'tight coupling'
I actually don't think it matters. People who don't know any better aren't going to make much use of anything that excites physicists anyway. Who cares what gets the masses all riled up?