We live in a system that considers it wrong to humiliate people who have not been convicted, but not wrong for the government to take the life of its own citizens. That sounds pretty inconsistent to me.
So it's okay to fry a man to death but it's not okay to broadcast pictures of people being locked up because it's 'humiliating.' If both of these issues went before the 9th circuit then I'm sure there'd be a bit more consistency.
...about this kind of technology. European lorry drivers have had to use tachographs for long time to assist law enforcement in ensuring that driving hours regulations are adhered to. As time has gone on they have become more difficult for drivers to tamper with, so the days are gone when a driver can just 'pull the fuse' on the tachograph when his hours are up and keep on driving.
It's easy. Just reconfigure the main deflector dish to emit a coherent tetreon pulse that will generate a de-facto tachyon surge ahead of the ship and miraculously save the ship with one second left on the timer.
The worker is free to take a job that doesn't compete with the original.
I don't mean this in a snotty way, but, a job like what? Flipping burgers at McDonalds? The old "you're free to work somewhere else" argument has been used to justify everything from this sort of thing to racial and sectarian discrimination. It's no defence.
Moreover, If we set a precedent where nobody can work for a competitor then we're getting into dangerous territory. If people are suddenly prevented from using the skills that they have acquired then we get a whole lot of wasted talent, a whole lot of people unable to get as high-paying a job as they had before, and a system close to collapse.
Teenager banned from supermarket to prevent him from shoplifting. In other news, a court injunction today prevented John Kerry from becoming President in case he might lie about weapons of mass destruction in some Middle Eastern country in the future. The department of pre-crime was unavailable for comment.
Seriously folks, who has the right to prevent you from working anywhere because of what you _might_ do? If he gives away trade secrets, _then_ go after him! Sheesh!
I don't think that the keyboard is going to be obsolete any day soon. Besides, an office full of people typing on keyboards is a lot quieter than an office full of people talking into microphones. And unless you want everyone hearing the contents of confidential documents as they are created, you'd have to give everyone a private office if you wanted to abolish qwerty.
Besides, programmers don't just type long screels of text. They jump about from one line to another, cut & paste, moves things around, etc etc etc. That kind of random activity is a lot more common for manys a programmer than the acutal typing of code, and the keyboard is the most efficient way of performing this.
A tunnel under the sea hauling passengers and trucks on high speed trains? Buying a ticket in London for a train ride to Paris or Brussels? That sounds pretty spectacular to me.
was where they thought that it'd be good if there were loads of wide-open roads through a city that looked more like some buildings scattered throughout a park rather than the traditional street built for people. Problem is, they ended up convincing the planners to adopt aspects of that philosophy and we ended up with such monstrosities as Los Angeles.
Pilot applications of a full-scale version of this driverless taxi system are soon to begin in the Soutwest of England. According to a May 6, 2004 press release by the SWRDA, "Prototype tests of ULTra have already been completed on a 1km track in Cardiff.
Cardff is in Wales, not England!)
I don't know what the latest is on that but Cardiff Council got into a lot of bother for gambling with taxpayers' money on such a futuristic system. I say good luck to them, it's worth a try.
Are you saying that the only thing wrong with protectionist measures is that they invite retaliation from other countries?
Nope, there are other disadvantages too, like keeping the cost of goods higher than they could be had free trade been allowed to keep things moving along at the best price. Best example of this is Bush's steel tarriffs (since rescinded after the EU threatened retaliatory measures on commodities produced in key electoral states) that kept the cost of steel high and ended up hurting domestic steel users for the sake of appeasing a domestic steel industry that was reluctant to sort out its overcapacity and other problems. Some people talk about protectionist measures as if the world was a simple place where only a single commodity is produced. It doesn't work like that.
Sorry I don't have time to respond to the rest, wanna get home and watch John Kerry's speech. Catch ya....
Well what some of the presidential candidates are proposing is tax breaks for companies that don't outsource. This is saving them money if they don't outsource. Saving money / subsidies. Tom-ate-o / Tom-ah-to.
I can say that corporations should not get subsidies (our money) if they send jobs oversees. That's not protectionism.
What you are proposing is subsidising companies who don't outsource, thus discouraging outsourcing for the short-term benefit of supposedly protecting jobs at home. This is protectionism.
Two men were walking past a building site and saw a mechanical digger doing some excavation work. One say to the other, "You know, if it weren't for that machine you could have ten men out there with shovels doing that work." The other replied, "And if it weren't for your shovels you could have a hundred men out there with teaspoons doing the same work."
There's a word for this idea that we should keep unecessary jobs at all costs and to hell with the price of the finished product. Communism.
Out sourcing is an evil plain and simple. Why should a company's profit be at the expense of an individuals welfare?
Please don't mod me into oblivion here, but it's worth hearing the arguments for outsourcing.
The extent to which jobs are being outsourced is a bit overstated. Yes, there are thousands of people being laid off and yes they may face a lot of difficulty until they find another job, but that is small compared to the 'churn' of jobs, i.e. the number of people chopping and changing jobs day in day out in the USA. It sounds like a lot when you hear the numbers totalled up, but in the grand scheme of things it's not that much.
Protectionism is always self-defeating in the end, be in trade or in labour. If you want foreign companies to stop investing in the USA and creating jobs for Americans, what better way than to take protectionist measures that will instantly invite retaliation?
Companies that could make components on their own account choose to sub-contract work out to smaller suppliers because they can do the same work cheaper and better. Same applies to companies that can get the same work done in foreign parts. Now there are times when it might not work out (like support calls being routed to India resulting in communication difficulties) and in that case the work will come back home and rightly so. In the end it's all about getting a better deal. If American companies can make it cheaper to buy products and services in the US, then the American economy as a whole benefits.
The rest of the world has people to feed, bills to pay, etc. If outsourcing helps to spread the wealth, stabilise the rest of the world and narrow the gap between rich and poor then let's do it. "But" I hear you say, "working for slave-labour wages does not a rich man make." True, but studies show that foreign investment in the developing world leads to an upward pressure on local wages. Workers for western firms in the developing world may earn less than their counterparts in the west, but compared to their counterparts locally, they earn more. The economist had an in-depth study on this about a year ago -- I wish I'd filed the data away somewhere because I don't think their online archive goes back indefinitely.
Slashdot Mirror
We live in a system that considers it wrong to humiliate people who have not been convicted, but not wrong for the government to take the life of its own citizens. That sounds pretty inconsistent to me.
So it's okay to fry a man to death but it's not okay to broadcast pictures of people being locked up because it's 'humiliating.' If both of these issues went before the 9th circuit then I'm sure there'd be a bit more consistency.
...about this kind of technology. European lorry drivers have had to use tachographs for long time to assist law enforcement in ensuring that driving hours regulations are adhered to. As time has gone on they have become more difficult for drivers to tamper with, so the days are gone when a driver can just 'pull the fuse' on the tachograph when his hours are up and keep on driving.
It's easy. Just reconfigure the main deflector dish to emit a coherent tetreon pulse that will generate a de-facto tachyon surge ahead of the ship and miraculously save the ship with one second left on the timer.
Moreover, If we set a precedent where nobody can work for a competitor then we're getting into dangerous territory. If people are suddenly prevented from using the skills that they have acquired then we get a whole lot of wasted talent, a whole lot of people unable to get as high-paying a job as they had before, and a system close to collapse.
Seriously folks, who has the right to prevent you from working anywhere because of what you _might_ do? If he gives away trade secrets, _then_ go after him! Sheesh!
(Please don't sue /.)
The old ?partner=google thing didn't work for me. :( Anyone got a registration-free link?
... is a Jar Jar Binks character.
Besides, programmers don't just type long screels of text. They jump about from one line to another, cut & paste, moves things around, etc etc etc. That kind of random activity is a lot more common for manys a programmer than the acutal typing of code, and the keyboard is the most efficient way of performing this.
wasn't far wrong.
A tunnel under the sea hauling passengers and trucks on high speed trains? Buying a ticket in London for a train ride to Paris or Brussels? That sounds pretty spectacular to me.
was where they thought that it'd be good if there were loads of wide-open roads through a city that looked more like some buildings scattered throughout a park rather than the traditional street built for people. Problem is, they ended up convincing the planners to adopt aspects of that philosophy and we ended up with such monstrosities as Los Angeles.
I fear that this is the first of many 'where is my flying car' gags.
But yeah, I was thinking, why don't they just amputate passengers' legs while they're at it?
(This little bit irritated me though:
Cardff is in Wales, not England!)I don't know what the latest is on that but Cardiff Council got into a lot of bother for gambling with taxpayers' money on such a futuristic system. I say good luck to them, it's worth a try.
Sorry I don't have time to respond to the rest, wanna get home and watch John Kerry's speech. Catch ya....
Well what some of the presidential candidates are proposing is tax breaks for companies that don't outsource. This is saving them money if they don't outsource. Saving money / subsidies. Tom-ate-o / Tom-ah-to.
Nothing else for it. I'll just have to commit suicide now.
There's a word for this idea that we should keep unecessary jobs at all costs and to hell with the price of the finished product. Communism.