It's a lot more effective to decry it as horrible (and do something about it) when you have concrete examples of people who have been bribing each other.
Is Assange finished with his "I hate America and want to bring down their evil, corrupt regime" business for the time being, then? Because I approve of this sort of leak; it does a lot more good in the world than the dubious Afghanistan-related stuff.
While manufactured goods and services are all nice and everything, you'd think that a site full of geeks would have a little more appreciation for the value of information. For instance: without a coupon for Groupon, I'd never have even known to stop by the cute little tea shop in downtown San Jose.
I'm not saying it's $25 billion valuable, or that it's an unmitigated boon to society, but have a little respect for the real positive effects you can get from advertising (like reduced costs of search) before you tear into them. More fair that way.:)
The other thing coupons enable is a form of price discrimination. A store like Safeway can charge rich software engineers one price, and poor Hispanic day laborers (and their families) another price, just by publishing coupons which the latter group is willing to track down, cut out, and bring into the store. That's the big deal behind coupons. You can look forward to more of this price discrimination in the future.
First, let me assure you that I kinda like the network neutrality angle. Protecting local telecom monopolies is not actually good for the economy.
However, it's important to realize a distinction between government-funded jobs and private-sector jobs. When the government spends money on people to keep them employed, it has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is the rest of the economy, and it does represent a real drag on the rest of the economy, and "a drag on the economy" does translate to "fewer jobs". No, taxing the rich is not a panacea. No, borrowing is not a panacea either (government borrowing crowds out regular borrowing, and means taxes or inflation down the road).
And at ~$61 billion dollars in savings per 700,000 people whose jobs were cut, that's an average price of $87,000/job. That's almost double the national median salary. Perhaps it's possible that we're overpaying for those jobs? Maybe? Would you at least be willing to admit that the notion might be worth considering and it's possible for a rational person to come to that conclusion?
The Earth Liberation Front sets fire to luxury homes. My neighbors up in Marin County claim to be allergic to wi-fi (therefore we should ban it in libraries, and also in the new PG&E smart-meters). But you're right. Those crazy people aren't the real radical evil special-interest groups of the green movement; it's all the companies who say they're "green" to get lots of government money and never have anything meaningful to show for it. Those jerks, and the corn ethanol lobby.
I'm doing hiring for my team. I don't care too much about the education: if the candidate can do a decent job on the coding quiz, they could be a Spanish major for all I care.
I understand why you might be concerned about too much technology in our childrens' development. However, I think that this isn't going to be one of those problematic technologies.... because honestly, it's IBM, they just pay their employees special bonuses to patent whatever they've brainstormed. I'm sure the patent will have expired by the time the toy actually exists.:b
There are stupid bubbles. It's true. But in the long run the stock market actually does result in investment in things like factories and oil pipelines and other useful goods and services, and it works more effectively than if you had to finance it one tycoon at a time. The real Ponzi scheme is Social Security.
The thing about short-term trading is that it's really short term. It doesn't usually have much effect in the long term, and only matters a lot if you're trying to compete with them in day-trading. (The one notable exception, the "flash crash", was reasonably extraordinary).
And if they were really introducing inefficiencies into the market, the next picosecond trader in line would be all to happy to arbitrage the difference, one way or another.
One of the nice things about sports people is that they tend to get published about, in almanacs and newspapers and the like. You can very easily find some high-quality factual information about their careers (as boring as the career itself may be). Assessing scientists as individual people is a lot harder; you can find lots of papers by scientists but will generally there will be less information about them.
No, that's the opinion of the community (people willing to participate in an Articles for Deletion discussion) as interpreted by the administrators in light of the community guidelines.
Not that they're without bias, but if 50 bona fide good-faith contributors (note: not random fans you dragged in off your local phpBB community to say "omg awesome") are saying "keep" and giving good reasons, and 5 are saying delete, an administrator who doesn't go along with the 50 is likely to be the subject of some future inquiry, and possibly censured or de-adminned.
The ruling party on Wikipedia is not "the administrators", it's "the people of the community who are willing to contribute (and who don't piss everyone off and flaunt the established guidelines while trying to get their way or effect change)".
Wikipedia is meant to condense information written in reliable secondary sources, that is, edited books, periodicals and websites, about the topic of the article. If there were no secondary sources from which to condense information into a Wikipedia article, what can you write in the article?
Hey people! You know all your whining about how Wikipedia needs to improve its reliability? Well, they raised standards, and this is the price! You can't have it both ways.
Also: good lord, do we really need a Slashdot front page story every time Wikipedia does something suboptimal?
Also 2: When an article is up for deletion and someone posts a link on some forum to get a bunch of fanboys to come in and flood the deletion debate (or any other debate), that's Generally Considered Lame and not really effective at building consensus. Slashdot too.
By using the wildly inaccurate phrase "copyright on the name" instead of, oh, trademark, you have demonstrated yourself inadequately informed to make proper comments on the subject. Which is a shame, because otherwise you're right.
Obviously, lots of people cringe, and even TFS refers to it as a possible redemption of the Itanium line's name (i.e. its reputation was pretty lousy to begin with).
On a tangentially related topic, my little sister once had a little internship with the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine. It basically consisted of giving puncture wounds to rats.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a lot more effective to decry it as horrible (and do something about it) when you have concrete examples of people who have been bribing each other.
Is Assange finished with his "I hate America and want to bring down their evil, corrupt regime" business for the time being, then? Because I approve of this sort of leak; it does a lot more good in the world than the dubious Afghanistan-related stuff.
While manufactured goods and services are all nice and everything, you'd think that a site full of geeks would have a little more appreciation for the value of information. For instance: without a coupon for Groupon, I'd never have even known to stop by the cute little tea shop in downtown San Jose.
I'm not saying it's $25 billion valuable, or that it's an unmitigated boon to society, but have a little respect for the real positive effects you can get from advertising (like reduced costs of search) before you tear into them. More fair that way. :)
The other thing coupons enable is a form of price discrimination. A store like Safeway can charge rich software engineers one price, and poor Hispanic day laborers (and their families) another price, just by publishing coupons which the latter group is willing to track down, cut out, and bring into the store. That's the big deal behind coupons. You can look forward to more of this price discrimination in the future.
Phew! I'll be sure to head down to Santa Cruz to keep safe from any fallout, then.
Hey, now. It doesn't have to be racism. It can also be plain old nationalism.
Personal information like an email address? Heaven forbid someone find out about that! You might get (more) spam!
For all that's wrong with Britain's libel system, this actually sounds like it'd pass muster in America as well, and a good thing for it, too.
And, for that matter, do you want to learn in the classroom, or in industry?
It's an option, but it's a really lousy option, and tends to work better as a last resort. (It'll get more popular support then anyway.)
However, it's important to realize a distinction between government-funded jobs and private-sector jobs. When the government spends money on people to keep them employed, it has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is the rest of the economy, and it does represent a real drag on the rest of the economy, and "a drag on the economy" does translate to "fewer jobs". No, taxing the rich is not a panacea. No, borrowing is not a panacea either (government borrowing crowds out regular borrowing, and means taxes or inflation down the road).
And at ~$61 billion dollars in savings per 700,000 people whose jobs were cut, that's an average price of $87,000/job. That's almost double the national median salary. Perhaps it's possible that we're overpaying for those jobs? Maybe? Would you at least be willing to admit that the notion might be worth considering and it's possible for a rational person to come to that conclusion?
Thanks.
The Earth Liberation Front sets fire to luxury homes. My neighbors up in Marin County claim to be allergic to wi-fi (therefore we should ban it in libraries, and also in the new PG&E smart-meters). But you're right. Those crazy people aren't the real radical evil special-interest groups of the green movement; it's all the companies who say they're "green" to get lots of government money and never have anything meaningful to show for it. Those jerks, and the corn ethanol lobby.
Also, through the wonders of technology, most digital scales have a button that switch between ounces and grams.
What will they think of next?
I'm doing hiring for my team. I don't care too much about the education: if the candidate can do a decent job on the coding quiz, they could be a Spanish major for all I care.
Other than that, sure, sounds spiffy. Now we just need to wait for something useful to do up in Space (and practical, for that matter.)
I understand why you might be concerned about too much technology in our childrens' development. However, I think that this isn't going to be one of those problematic technologies.... because honestly, it's IBM, they just pay their employees special bonuses to patent whatever they've brainstormed. I'm sure the patent will have expired by the time the toy actually exists. :b
I dunno if it's quite as simple as that. I'm pretty sure somebody has to know how to do basic maintenance, even for a gun like the AK-47.
And a five-minute course in how to not to be a doofus would be nice too. (e.g. hold it properly, use short bursts, etc.)
There are stupid bubbles. It's true. But in the long run the stock market actually does result in investment in things like factories and oil pipelines and other useful goods and services, and it works more effectively than if you had to finance it one tycoon at a time. The real Ponzi scheme is Social Security.
The thing about short-term trading is that it's really short term. It doesn't usually have much effect in the long term, and only matters a lot if you're trying to compete with them in day-trading. (The one notable exception, the "flash crash", was reasonably extraordinary).
And if they were really introducing inefficiencies into the market, the next picosecond trader in line would be all to happy to arbitrage the difference, one way or another.
One of the nice things about sports people is that they tend to get published about, in almanacs and newspapers and the like. You can very easily find some high-quality factual information about their careers (as boring as the career itself may be). Assessing scientists as individual people is a lot harder; you can find lots of papers by scientists but will generally there will be less information about them.
No, that's the opinion of the community (people willing to participate in an Articles for Deletion discussion) as interpreted by the administrators in light of the community guidelines.
Not that they're without bias, but if 50 bona fide good-faith contributors (note: not random fans you dragged in off your local phpBB community to say "omg awesome") are saying "keep" and giving good reasons, and 5 are saying delete, an administrator who doesn't go along with the 50 is likely to be the subject of some future inquiry, and possibly censured or de-adminned.
The ruling party on Wikipedia is not "the administrators", it's "the people of the community who are willing to contribute (and who don't piss everyone off and flaunt the established guidelines while trying to get their way or effect change)".
Hey people! You know all your whining about how Wikipedia needs to improve its reliability? Well, they raised standards, and this is the price! You can't have it both ways.
Also: good lord, do we really need a Slashdot front page story every time Wikipedia does something suboptimal?
Also 2: When an article is up for deletion and someone posts a link on some forum to get a bunch of fanboys to come in and flood the deletion debate (or any other debate), that's Generally Considered Lame and not really effective at building consensus. Slashdot too.
By using the wildly inaccurate phrase "copyright on the name" instead of, oh, trademark, you have demonstrated yourself inadequately informed to make proper comments on the subject. Which is a shame, because otherwise you're right.
Obviously, lots of people cringe, and even TFS refers to it as a possible redemption of the Itanium line's name (i.e. its reputation was pretty lousy to begin with).
Maybe it's better, but can you package it up and send it to the developing world so the kids can read along, for cheap?
On a tangentially related topic, my little sister once had a little internship with the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine. It basically consisted of giving puncture wounds to rats.