Bravo, sir, for pointing out what is a truth that escapes so many people with depressing regularity. Apple is under no obligation to provide a venue for anyone's "expression".
That said, that Apple feels the need to enforce some puritanical standard of "decency" (not even a swimsuit model, for chrisake?) is what is really alarming. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If you don't like women showing their naughty bits, like their navels, apparently, don't by the app. Why make Apple the enforcer of your hung-up "moral code"?
Hello?
Guys, this is not exactly insightful. There is more to the "economically viable" equation than the price of natural gas. Reducing our reliance on fossil fuel has more impact than "goodwill". Granted, it's harder to measure than those things measured by the gas and electric meter, but they are measurable, nonetheless.
Straw man...
Assumes things that are not true...
etc....
Those of us actually paying the bill for health care in the U.S. are paying to much. Period. We spend, overall, more dollars and have, by any credible measure, less to show for it. These facts are a matter of record. On the other hand, most of those countries who do get more for their money do it through some form of government run system. So tell us again how the U.S. government can't do what the government of every other industrialized country in the world does with no trouble?
I wouldn't think of it. Just because 95% of the "news" reported by Fox is partisan bullshit, doesn't automatically make everything they say untrustworthy, only 95% of it, so you have to listen and apply critical thinking skills before you decide to accept or reject it. Alas, 95% of Fox News viewers omit that important second step.
Meh...
That's part of the beauty of the mod system here. The outliers (usually) get washed away by the crowd. It isn't perfect, but what is?
BTW, if you hadn't mentioned it, I'd have not even known that someone objected to protecting our civil rights. Some "patriot", obviously.:)
"...we have been tied to seat time for 100 years..."
Amen.
My niece lives in Washington and was able to take advantage of this program. She graduated from Washington State University last year, at the age of 20. That she is a hard worker goes almost without saying, but I see nothing but good about rewarding that hard work with the huge head start she got in the pursuit of her baccalaureate.
In a society where we are now so ready to trade privacy and other personal liberties for the (often empty) promise of security, it is no surprise at all that this or that government entity should feel no compunction at this gross affront to the privacy of their students and their families. And let's be clear, someone had to have had second thoughts about this, and still they went ahead with this staggeringly stupid plan.
I hope that not only do the tools responsible for this have their asses handed to them in civil court, I sincerely hope that those asses are then tossed into prison for what has to be a long list of criminal statutes that have been violated.
Sorry, this is definitely a case of "should". Clueless Twitter users (prepending "clueless" seems almost redundant...) who advertise to the world stuff that only a fool would advertise in any other medium need to have their noses rubbed in their own stupidity.
What "market forces" would those be, exactly? In the vast majority of markets, there is one, or at most two, consumer broadband vendor(s). Where there are two, offerings are usually similar enough in value that switching (and thus actually exerting some market "force", is pointless.
IThe opacity of this whole process is proof enough that its not expected to be a popular body of law and probably is does not promote the general welfare but rather those of specific few. I don't think we need to see whats in to be opposed.
So..., business as usual, then?
If you have enough money, you can buy from a government anything you want; business contracts, regulations, exceptions from regulations, even war (a real, "shooting" war) on "enemies" whose policies threaten your profitability. In the U.S. no individual would get away with such "tyranny", but corporations can and do, all the time, because "What's good for business, is good for the American people. Anything else is socialism. Now shut up and grab your ankles..."
Yeah! So get off our lawns...
Someone, anyone, please try again to explain to me why the hell I want to share portions of my personal life on some "social networking" site, or more importantly, why I should think that anyone cares enough about such dreck to warrant even the meager resources required to host it?
Unified? Hardly. Although the "more government and less individualism is better" viewpoint dominates ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS*.....
[Citation needed]
The "liberal mainstream media" meme is just so much bullshit, advanced and/or swallowed by people who want (for whatever reason) to hear what genuinely extreme right wing outlets like Fox News have to say. In truth, "mainstream" media has a conservative agenda, which is hardly surprising given the ownership of most of those outlets and their wholesale abandonment of journalistic ideals. It's just not as far right as the drooling ditto-heads would like, so it gets labeled "liberal".
Yes I know that people will object to this comment, but when Obamacare passes I won't be allowed to chose NOT to buy health insurance without getting fined ~$1000. I call that anti-individualism. I will be forced to conform like a paper cutout doll. (Or serf.)
You won't hear me object to that comment. This "healthcare reform" bill is one big gift to the insurance industry, adding 30-some million customers to their business. The argument, of course, is that all those un-insured people have their healthcare paid for by the rest of us, in the form of inflated prices and concomittantly higher premiums, so let's get everyone insured so they don't have to go to the ER for a sinus infection. The problem is that there are other ways to crack that nut that have been proven to be far more cost effective, but those were taken off the table early on.
Get it?
No, seriously, I mean it is cool that the notion of a free press could be so powerful that an entire nation could be moved to enshrine it in law, thereby creating a beacon of truth for the rest of the world, or a thorn in their side, depending on what got posted.
[sigh...] I remember when the United States was something like that.
...that I underestimated (by a bunch) the speed at which "our" government has gone about dismantling The Constitution and The Bill of Rights since outlining the process in the "Patriot Act". While the Patriot Act was bad, and while I knew it was a sign of things to come, I really rather expected it to take a generation or two for people to get used to the ass-raping being given to their civil rights in the name of security. That this suggestion isn't being greeted, in every quarter, with torches and pitchforks is deeply troubling.
Dude,
Tell me that you didn't not get the "Warriors" reference...
More seriously, would you prefer cyber "cops"? Cops or warriors, the terminology does, in my mind, trivialize this truly global contest (war, battle, struggle, whatever). As others have observed, there is some serious talent out there and it is well motivated. Unless/until there is similar motivation for those inclined to wear white hats, things are going to get worse, not better. The military will (just like in Gibson's novels) understand the threat and build or buy the best defenses. Big Corporate World will, eventually, come to a similar conclusion and pony up, though signs seem to indicate that this will be later, rather than sooner. The rest of us are on our own. "The government" can't/won't throw enough resources at the problem to keep the spam bots off grandma's PC. And honestly, I am not sure I want anyone, especially the government, that close (as in close enough to make a difference) to my edge of the network.
Yes. It is mine to do with as I wish. Offer me a fair price and see what I do. OK, now offer me a what you genuinely believe to be a fair price. If I decline that it's a safe bet that our values are not the same. That you can't grasp that is abundantly clear in your equating my house with "the house next door". There are things about my house that I value far higher than anything you can offer me. I am dumbfounded that you are so dim as to even try to buy me off.
Oh, and by the way, since the dying people are dying because of your doings in the first place, the whole guilt trip thing is also a waste of time. Clean up your own fucking mess.
Bravo, sir! You have just illustrated that the "free market" is a myth in an society where regulatory influence can be bought at rates low enough to make it pay. Which is to say, it is a myth, totally.
Now, if it were illegal for businesses to spend money in order to influence the government of the people, things would be different. Alas, that horse has left the barn.
If we don't solve the terrestrial problems, we will suffocate, "...and disappear". Unless someone can make an as-yet unknown value proposition for going back to the moon, it's a waste of resources.
The question is -- given the above -- were they really?
That's easy. Yes. The certainly did/do. The beauty of algorithms is that they are never arbitrary or capricious. If you write one that results in a DMCA take-down notice when it clearly shouldn't have, your algorithm is broken. You wrote it, so you own it - and the ramifications of turning it loose.
If we get the government that we deserve, and the 'tea-baggers' want to change the government, what does it say of you to oppose them while you agree with their ideals? (Hint, see the above statement)
It says that I know that the corporate sponsored "tea parties" are quite effective at convincing mindless sheep to act, and vote, in a way the benefits those interests the most. Corruption and hypocrisy certainly pervade both sides of the aisle. The joke that is what "healthcare reform" has become is ample evidence of that. Truly effective reform, like that which would have provided a more effective (clinically and fiscally) system in place, was never even on the table. But when the Republicans have been at the wheel, the game was raised to a whole new level. The ledgers of the federal government provide ample evidence of this. Anyone who continues to believe that "Republican" = fiscally responsible is a fool's fool, but there they are, swallowing the bullshit with more gusto than ever, having had their latent racist fears whipped to a frenzy by skilled manipulators.
Slashdot Mirror
Bravo, sir, for pointing out what is a truth that escapes so many people with depressing regularity. Apple is under no obligation to provide a venue for anyone's "expression".
That said, that Apple feels the need to enforce some puritanical standard of "decency" (not even a swimsuit model, for chrisake?) is what is really alarming. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If you don't like women showing their naughty bits, like their navels, apparently, don't by the app. Why make Apple the enforcer of your hung-up "moral code"?
ROI is a misleading concept. You can't just figure ROI based on your PG&E bill over 30 years time..
Really? Why not? The experts on Fox News do it all the time.
Hello?
Guys, this is not exactly insightful. There is more to the "economically viable" equation than the price of natural gas. Reducing our reliance on fossil fuel has more impact than "goodwill". Granted, it's harder to measure than those things measured by the gas and electric meter, but they are measurable, nonetheless.
Straw man...
Assumes things that are not true...
etc....
Those of us actually paying the bill for health care in the U.S. are paying to much. Period. We spend, overall, more dollars and have, by any credible measure, less to show for it. These facts are a matter of record. On the other hand, most of those countries who do get more for their money do it through some form of government run system. So tell us again how the U.S. government can't do what the government of every other industrialized country in the world does with no trouble?
Sorry guys, but this crap is a complete waste of my time.
I wouldn't think of it. Just because 95% of the "news" reported by Fox is partisan bullshit, doesn't automatically make everything they say untrustworthy, only 95% of it, so you have to listen and apply critical thinking skills before you decide to accept or reject it. Alas, 95% of Fox News viewers omit that important second step.
Meh... :)
That's part of the beauty of the mod system here. The outliers (usually) get washed away by the crowd. It isn't perfect, but what is?
BTW, if you hadn't mentioned it, I'd have not even known that someone objected to protecting our civil rights. Some "patriot", obviously.
"...we have been tied to seat time for 100 years..."
Amen.
My niece lives in Washington and was able to take advantage of this program. She graduated from Washington State University last year, at the age of 20. That she is a hard worker goes almost without saying, but I see nothing but good about rewarding that hard work with the huge head start she got in the pursuit of her baccalaureate.
In a society where we are now so ready to trade privacy and other personal liberties for the (often empty) promise of security, it is no surprise at all that this or that government entity should feel no compunction at this gross affront to the privacy of their students and their families. And let's be clear, someone had to have had second thoughts about this, and still they went ahead with this staggeringly stupid plan.
I hope that not only do the tools responsible for this have their asses handed to them in civil court, I sincerely hope that those asses are then tossed into prison for what has to be a long list of criminal statutes that have been violated.
Sorry, this is definitely a case of "should". Clueless Twitter users (prepending "clueless" seems almost redundant...) who advertise to the world stuff that only a fool would advertise in any other medium need to have their noses rubbed in their own stupidity.
What "market forces" would those be, exactly? In the vast majority of markets, there is one, or at most two, consumer broadband vendor(s). Where there are two, offerings are usually similar enough in value that switching (and thus actually exerting some market "force", is pointless.
IThe opacity of this whole process is proof enough that its not expected to be a popular body of law and probably is does not promote the general welfare but rather those of specific few. I don't think we need to see whats in to be opposed.
So..., business as usual, then?
If you have enough money, you can buy from a government anything you want; business contracts, regulations, exceptions from regulations, even war (a real, "shooting" war) on "enemies" whose policies threaten your profitability. In the U.S. no individual would get away with such "tyranny", but corporations can and do, all the time, because "What's good for business, is good for the American people. Anything else is socialism. Now shut up and grab your ankles..."
Yeah, and you probably still think digital watches were a good idea...
You already don't have to go there ever again...
Yeah! So get off our lawns...
Someone, anyone, please try again to explain to me why the hell I want to share portions of my personal life on some "social networking" site, or more importantly, why I should think that anyone cares enough about such dreck to warrant even the meager resources required to host it?
Anyone?
Unified? Hardly. Although the "more government and less individualism is better" viewpoint dominates ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS*.....
[Citation needed]
The "liberal mainstream media" meme is just so much bullshit, advanced and/or swallowed by people who want (for whatever reason) to hear what genuinely extreme right wing outlets like Fox News have to say. In truth, "mainstream" media has a conservative agenda, which is hardly surprising given the ownership of most of those outlets and their wholesale abandonment of journalistic ideals. It's just not as far right as the drooling ditto-heads would like, so it gets labeled "liberal".
Yes I know that people will object to this comment, but when Obamacare passes I won't be allowed to chose NOT to buy health insurance without getting fined ~$1000. I call that anti-individualism. I will be forced to conform like a paper cutout doll. (Or serf.)
You won't hear me object to that comment. This "healthcare reform" bill is one big gift to the insurance industry, adding 30-some million customers to their business. The argument, of course, is that all those un-insured people have their healthcare paid for by the rest of us, in the form of inflated prices and concomittantly higher premiums, so let's get everyone insured so they don't have to go to the ER for a sinus infection. The problem is that there are other ways to crack that nut that have been proven to be far more cost effective, but those were taken off the table early on.
Get it?
No, seriously, I mean it is cool that the notion of a free press could be so powerful that an entire nation could be moved to enshrine it in law, thereby creating a beacon of truth for the rest of the world, or a thorn in their side, depending on what got posted. [sigh...] I remember when the United States was something like that.
...that I underestimated (by a bunch) the speed at which "our" government has gone about dismantling The Constitution and The Bill of Rights since outlining the process in the "Patriot Act". While the Patriot Act was bad, and while I knew it was a sign of things to come, I really rather expected it to take a generation or two for people to get used to the ass-raping being given to their civil rights in the name of security. That this suggestion isn't being greeted, in every quarter, with torches and pitchforks is deeply troubling.
Dude,
Tell me that you didn't not get the "Warriors" reference...
More seriously, would you prefer cyber "cops"? Cops or warriors, the terminology does, in my mind, trivialize this truly global contest (war, battle, struggle, whatever). As others have observed, there is some serious talent out there and it is well motivated. Unless/until there is similar motivation for those inclined to wear white hats, things are going to get worse, not better. The military will (just like in Gibson's novels) understand the threat and build or buy the best defenses. Big Corporate World will, eventually, come to a similar conclusion and pony up, though signs seem to indicate that this will be later, rather than sooner. The rest of us are on our own. "The government" can't/won't throw enough resources at the problem to keep the spam bots off grandma's PC. And honestly, I am not sure I want anyone, especially the government, that close (as in close enough to make a difference) to my edge of the network.
Yes. It is mine to do with as I wish. Offer me a fair price and see what I do. OK, now offer me a what you genuinely believe to be a fair price. If I decline that it's a safe bet that our values are not the same. That you can't grasp that is abundantly clear in your equating my house with "the house next door". There are things about my house that I value far higher than anything you can offer me. I am dumbfounded that you are so dim as to even try to buy me off.
Oh, and by the way, since the dying people are dying because of your doings in the first place, the whole guilt trip thing is also a waste of time. Clean up your own fucking mess.
Oh, that slow-moving American game, with the sissy padding and helmets. [Yawn...]
There's a difference between a government running corporations and a government regulating corporations.
[citation needed]
...and no. Fox News and the usual assortment of "reliable tea-bagger sources" doesn't count.
Ahem...
[crickets...]
Bravo, sir! You have just illustrated that the "free market" is a myth in an society where regulatory influence can be bought at rates low enough to make it pay. Which is to say, it is a myth, totally.
Now, if it were illegal for businesses to spend money in order to influence the government of the people, things would be different. Alas, that horse has left the barn.
If we don't solve the terrestrial problems, we will suffocate, "...and disappear". Unless someone can make an as-yet unknown value proposition for going back to the moon, it's a waste of resources.
The question is -- given the above -- were they really?
That's easy. Yes. The certainly did/do. The beauty of algorithms is that they are never arbitrary or capricious. If you write one that results in a DMCA take-down notice when it clearly shouldn't have, your algorithm is broken. You wrote it, so you own it - and the ramifications of turning it loose.
If we get the government that we deserve, and the 'tea-baggers' want to change the government, what does it say of you to oppose them while you agree with their ideals? (Hint, see the above statement)
It says that I know that the corporate sponsored "tea parties" are quite effective at convincing mindless sheep to act, and vote, in a way the benefits those interests the most. Corruption and hypocrisy certainly pervade both sides of the aisle. The joke that is what "healthcare reform" has become is ample evidence of that. Truly effective reform, like that which would have provided a more effective (clinically and fiscally) system in place, was never even on the table. But when the Republicans have been at the wheel, the game was raised to a whole new level. The ledgers of the federal government provide ample evidence of this. Anyone who continues to believe that "Republican" = fiscally responsible is a fool's fool, but there they are, swallowing the bullshit with more gusto than ever, having had their latent racist fears whipped to a frenzy by skilled manipulators.