socialist enterprises were under tight government control, but organisationally separated from the government.
the things that were markedly different from a Western private corporation were that instead of sales and marketing you'd have a "planning" department which would coordinate production and sales goals with a ministry; instead of getting capital from a VC you'd get it from the government; a loan would not only be approved by the bank, it'd be approved by a ministry official as well and then given to you by the bank; that surplus would not be retained or distributed to shareholders, but go into the government budget at the end of the fiscal year, and, of course, that personnel decisions at high levels would involve the party.
You're wrong, it was most certainly driven for its beneficial economic effects. The Soviet planning system was most certainly counting the inputs and the outputs of its nuclear power stations more or less along the lines of a Western corporation. Believe it or not, they were even using double entry accounting.
Well, if you have convinced yourself that using the drones to police Afghanistan is a war, be my guest. I am certainly not going to argue the obvious with every nut on slashdot, but that doesn't make you any less wrong.
Afghanistan is not a war. It started as a revenge act against the country because it allegedly harbored Bin Laden and it went on to be a nation-building debacle. What are the real motives behind it I don't know, and neither do you, but a war it ain't.
Drones aren't used in a war, they are used to police by murder people from a foreign jurisdiction without any kind of due process. Drone operations are very error-prone, cannot be appealed by the receiving end in any way, manner and form whatsoever. They seem expedient, but they set a bad precedent and create a lot of animosity among those, who are subject to the treatment.
Are they the best answer to the problem they are purportedly solving?
Elimination of your "enemy" as a tool for solving problems (internal, like keeping power, economic growth or resource acquisition, or external, such as threats from belligerent neighbours) was probably the most straightforward solution when level of technological and social development was comparatively low. The question that needs to be asked and answered is how appropriate is it today, and is there a better way.
It is a long topic, and Slashdot isn't the right place to pour one's soul out in a long treatise, but my opinion on the matter is that there is very little creative thinking involved when solving international problems, and the reason for this is that the people who end up being in charge are, by the virtue of the selection process to get them there, poorly equipped to solve such problems.
Hence, we tend to get suboptimal solutions as a matter of course, and it is only after a major crisis that such tendency is temporarily corrected.
Yep. There is a reason murderers in general and the government-sponsored murder in Kampuchea, Rwanda and the Nazi camps is not cherished, but frowned upon.
No, I'd rather go forward to using the proper tools for the job, like addressing the problems that result in unwanted consequences like terrorism. But shooting is so easy.
Sorry. You could have replied with a reference to the Speaker for the Dead. I think it would be very appropriate that the people who are about to be shot from the air had someone to say a word on their behalf to someone. Not the drone pilots or their commanders, but to the executives who make the decision to kill them based on largely one-sided, information. Not as good as a due process, but still an improvement over Call of Duty.
There is no guilt. The "enemy" is no longer people, but pixels rendered in false colour. No need to justify or otherwise rationalize murder. Neat. Welcome to the Ender's game.
Even simpler - if you let some people game the system against you and one day you end up on the receiving end, open wide. The democracy is like the security -- it is a process, not a state. The moment the citizenry relaxes its vigilance (and back muscles) is the moment its freedomz are under attack (and democracy is anally raped).
Actually, this piece of news underlines nicely what i have been saying for ages. there is no "cyber warfare", it is mostly one big cost-cutting measure for the management of software/it companies and their larger customers, which dumps the protection of incompetence and irresponsibility onto the public finances.
Actually, he may have a point in his particular context. If you give your staff the burnout on current tech and no time to develop new skills, you can do even better than "useless at 40" - "useless at 30" is also fully achievable.
I am not saying medicine is harmless (see my first comment above for a story very similar to your own), but I am by no means certain that direct brain stimulation will have milder effects. We just don't know what will be possible yet.
This is the benign alternative. Consider the worse options -- from completely bogus ones like the Matrix, to completely possible ones like bugs in the first few generations that will wreak temporary havoc with your head and cause all sorts of trouble.
I have a close relative who was mis-prescribed some drug with severe mental "side" effects. As a result of only a few doses, we had to take care of a person who turned schizophrenic by the medicine. It was awful and expensive, and neither the medical profession nor the pharmacological industry consider it a problem, just a "side effect".
I just glued the screen of my Nexus 7 so that it doesn't squeak, replaced the lens of my iPhone 5 to avoid the purple flare, I'll fix this too. Bring it on!
In slightly more general numeric terms, finite is much below 9000, almost infinite is the interval from there up to and including 9000, and everything over 9000 is infinite.
What "contrary" are you talking about, and what "planning ahead"? Romney was trailing throughout the campaign, and it was quite obvious that he won't be elected for at least the last 10 days. You want your country to be lead by delusional people like these?
Slashdot Mirror
socialist enterprises were under tight government control, but organisationally separated from the government.
the things that were markedly different from a Western private corporation were that instead of sales and marketing you'd have a "planning" department which would coordinate production and sales goals with a ministry; instead of getting capital from a VC you'd get it from the government; a loan would not only be approved by the bank, it'd be approved by a ministry official as well and then given to you by the bank; that surplus would not be retained or distributed to shareholders, but go into the government budget at the end of the fiscal year, and, of course, that personnel decisions at high levels would involve the party.
Other than that it was much the same crap.
You're wrong, it was most certainly driven for its beneficial economic effects. The Soviet planning system was most certainly counting the inputs and the outputs of its nuclear power stations more or less along the lines of a Western corporation. Believe it or not, they were even using double entry accounting.
Well, if you have convinced yourself that using the drones to police Afghanistan is a war, be my guest. I am certainly not going to argue the obvious with every nut on slashdot, but that doesn't make you any less wrong.
I am afraid you're right.
Afghanistan is not a war. It started as a revenge act against the country because it allegedly harbored Bin Laden and it went on to be a nation-building debacle. What are the real motives behind it I don't know, and neither do you, but a war it ain't.
Drones aren't used in a war, they are used to police by murder people from a foreign jurisdiction without any kind of due process. Drone operations are very error-prone, cannot be appealed by the receiving end in any way, manner and form whatsoever. They seem expedient, but they set a bad precedent and create a lot of animosity among those, who are subject to the treatment.
Are they the best answer to the problem they are purportedly solving?
If you read, you're too old. There's a cool app in your shiny smartphone can read twitter for you and twit what you speak to it.
Elimination of your "enemy" as a tool for solving problems (internal, like keeping power, economic growth or resource acquisition, or external, such as threats from belligerent neighbours) was probably the most straightforward solution when level of technological and social development was comparatively low. The question that needs to be asked and answered is how appropriate is it today, and is there a better way.
It is a long topic, and Slashdot isn't the right place to pour one's soul out in a long treatise, but my opinion on the matter is that there is very little creative thinking involved when solving international problems, and the reason for this is that the people who end up being in charge are, by the virtue of the selection process to get them there, poorly equipped to solve such problems.
Hence, we tend to get suboptimal solutions as a matter of course, and it is only after a major crisis that such tendency is temporarily corrected.
Yep. There is a reason murderers in general and the government-sponsored murder in Kampuchea, Rwanda and the Nazi camps is not cherished, but frowned upon.
No, I'd rather go forward to using the proper tools for the job, like addressing the problems that result in unwanted consequences like terrorism. But shooting is so easy.
Sorry. You could have replied with a reference to the Speaker for the Dead. I think it would be very appropriate that the people who are about to be shot from the air had someone to say a word on their behalf to someone. Not the drone pilots or their commanders, but to the executives who make the decision to kill them based on largely one-sided, information. Not as good as a due process, but still an improvement over Call of Duty.
There is no guilt. The "enemy" is no longer people, but pixels rendered in false colour. No need to justify or otherwise rationalize murder. Neat. Welcome to the Ender's game.
Of course not, it is for the company legal counsel to peruse. I just use the device.
Why? Do iPads come with mandatory sex change surgery?
Even simpler - if you let some people game the system against you and one day you end up on the receiving end, open wide. The democracy is like the security -- it is a process, not a state. The moment the citizenry relaxes its vigilance (and back muscles) is the moment its freedomz are under attack (and democracy is anally raped).
Yours, dirty K.O.
Actually, this piece of news underlines nicely what i have been saying for ages. there is no "cyber warfare", it is mostly one big cost-cutting measure for the management of software/it companies and their larger customers, which dumps the protection of incompetence and irresponsibility onto the public finances.
Actually, he may have a point in his particular context. If you give your staff the burnout on current tech and no time to develop new skills, you can do even better than "useless at 40" - "useless at 30" is also fully achievable.
I am not saying medicine is harmless (see my first comment above for a story very similar to your own), but I am by no means certain that direct brain stimulation will have milder effects. We just don't know what will be possible yet.
That remains to be seen.
This is the benign alternative. Consider the worse options -- from completely bogus ones like the Matrix, to completely possible ones like bugs in the first few generations that will wreak temporary havoc with your head and cause all sorts of trouble.
I have a close relative who was mis-prescribed some drug with severe mental "side" effects. As a result of only a few doses, we had to take care of a person who turned schizophrenic by the medicine. It was awful and expensive, and neither the medical profession nor the pharmacological industry consider it a problem, just a "side effect".
I just glued the screen of my Nexus 7 so that it doesn't squeak, replaced the lens of my iPhone 5 to avoid the purple flare, I'll fix this too. Bring it on!
In slightly more general numeric terms, finite is much below 9000, almost infinite is the interval from there up to and including 9000, and everything over 9000 is infinite.
What "contrary" are you talking about, and what "planning ahead"? Romney was trailing throughout the campaign, and it was quite obvious that he won't be elected for at least the last 10 days. You want your country to be lead by delusional people like these?
And the advisers are in to confirm what I'm saying: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57547239/adviser-romney-shellshocked-by-loss/?tag=socsh
Not unless the decision also mandates a comprehensive ban on abortions and contraception.