Great. Pay-as-you-go policing and a subscription-only Army (haven't paid? fight your own war).
Forget for the moment that defense is one of the few things the federal government is actually charged with doing (by the Constitution).
I notice you left out ambulances/emergency services. Many ambulances, most perhaps, are commercial services, not government run.
Public education is not "free," it is paid for by taxpayers like me, and squandered by people who do not appreciate it because they don't have to work to pay for it. Those that really do appreciate it would be able to receive education through charitable organizations if people were giving less money to the government, and had more available to donate.
You have all these "underpaid" public school teachers, many of whom are not good and/or qualified for the jobs, trying to teach a bunch of kids, many of whom do everything in their power to avoid school/work. This problem has arisen because the government is running the school system. Period. No, I am definitely not happy about our "free education" system. It's fucked.
You don't think the money the federal government is spending rescuing Louisians from the roofs of their houses isn't being wisely spent?
Should we spend the money and get it done? Yes. Is it wisely spent? No. There was a mandatory evacuation in most parts. Those people should not have been there. That's why so many are dying. Maybe next time they'll heed the warnings. (Maybe we can stop subsidizing flood insurance with taxpayer money, too... let them pay for the risks they are taking by living in a flood plain.)
That being said, the two things you mentioned are two things that the federal government is SUPPOSED TO DO. Libertarians don't have a problem funding those types of gov't activities.
You, however, conveniently ignore all the money that is wasted on pork barrel spending and useless social programs, loopholes for lobbyists, etc.
Read some of the studies on this site, a non-partisan site, and tell me if you honestly still think the government is spending money wisely:
Again, you are missing my point. I never said businesses operate because they are noble! Obviously that is not true of 99% of all businesses. I am talking about the idea that there is a mutual benefit to companies and people. This is a point lost on most of slashdot readers, who like to think of companies as evil, to simplify their worldview.
There's nothing noble about me exchanging money for groceries, and there's nothing noble about my employer paying me for my time. It's a business transaction, period.
You totally missed my point. You are describing the end result transactions. No, those aren't noble.
The fact that there is a company out there that is enabling you to purchase all the goods and services you want and need is noble. The fact that your employer took the initiative to create a company that creates products/services and employs people is noble.
No, we're mad at you for being a prick who thought he'd be smug and take the "what have you done" route, and it failed miserably.
I love it. A bunch of true pricks get on slashdot and bitch about a company that is offering assistance, and anyone that calls them on it is called a prick. This thread just gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it.
Wow, he donated what he could afford. So did I.
Using his and your logic, let me ask, why didn't he max out his credit card to help even more? Take vacation from work and fly to LA to help? Drive to the corner hospital and donate blood? Why didn't his employer donate more money?
The point is, T-Mobile is doing something. Why bitch about it?
As if a company wouldn't go for cheap PR. Goodness, no, not those innocent corporate angels.
This is beside the point entirely. Every company and person that publicly contributes money to an effort knows they will get good PR in return. So what? Does that diminish the net effect of their help?
Only on Slashdot, luckily, where the real world is far, far away.
Reality: America has millions of peace-loving Muslims living in our country, many are citizens.
Reality: We have only used nuclear weapons twice, both in Japan, to end World War II.
Now try to present any facts to back up your point of view. You cannot do it, because your point of view is illogical. We are targeting insurgents and terrorists. Obviously many of them are Muslims. That does not mean we are targeting Muslims. To say we are is to use a logical fallacy.
Which is amazing if you think about it, not only do they donate the most needed resource (potable water) immediately, they actually hurt their production to do it. It's amazing, a corporation that does the Right thing.
I agree, it's great of them to do it, my previous joke about their product notwithstanding.
However, it's definitely not "amazing" for a corporation to do "the right thing." Corporations do the right thing every day: they create good and services you use, they pay employees, they earn money for stockholders like you and me, they often donate some of their proceeds to charities.
Sadly, there are many on slashdot who would like to pretend CORPORATIONS == BAD based on how a few corporations operate.
That'd be like me thinking all liberals are morons based on just what Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Ted Kennedy do.
You're mad at me because you didn't like someone criticizing you for not doing enough to help the victims of Katrina, when in fact you are doing something.
PLEASE can we stop linking to the entire stupid hierarchy of news.com.com.com.com, zdnet, cnet and other stupid useless sites like that? Schneier is a big boy, he can handle/. - and if not, there's always coral.
I think we should link to both.
While unlikely (at CNET), it is possible that a news organization would present both sides of the story in an unbiased fashion, whereas if you just link to Schneier, you'll be getting only his take on it.
It is one of those words when you first hear it you imagine this immense technology behind it. But no, it is a URL to an audio file, inserted into XML.
Jesus Christ. How many times does this stupid notion have to be corrected on Slashdot, where the readers are SUPPOSED to be just a WEE BIT smarter than the norm? (No, I'm not new here.)
Podcasting is not just "a link to an audio file in some XML". It is the ability for anyone, professional or amateur, to record an audio program in serial fashion, and allow someone to EASILY SUBSCRIBE to receive the latest version of the show in their favorite listening device.
Your description of it is like saying a website is just text that you can download via HTTP. While technically that is true, it is in how it is used that makes it new and unique. I may remind you, "the web" used to be a buzzword, until it became ubiquitous.
Say what you like about their "beer", Anheuser-Busch has a long history of switching their closest functional production line to canning water, and delivering it *right now*.
Are you sure they really switched anything in their production line?
Is ScionLife liable? Am I? Is Slashdot liable now that I've put it up here?
Liable for what? If you spoke the truth about them and can prove it, you have nothing to fear.
If you libeled the company, yes you are liable.
In my opinion, ScionLife and Slashdot would not liable for your libel, but could be liable if they were notified the information was libel and did not pull it (then again, only if you libeled them, which would really have to be proven in a court of law).
And finally, if someone spray paints a swastica on my garage door while I'm out of town and unable to remove it, am I liable for a hate crime?
The hate crime was committed against you, so why would you be liable for it? This is like asking if a company would be liable if a user libeled it on its own site. The analogy is bad.
(b) It wasn't the worst hurricane in history, or even the history of the U.S.
(c) This is a tech news site
Also, let me twist this around on you, Mr. Concerned. "What the hell is wrong with you? 1000 people died in a stampede in Iraq today, and you want to talk about a hurricane that killed a few hundred people? GET SOME PRIORITIES!"
And as an addendum to my other reply, I found this quote from wikipedia:
"[Chavez] said that Venezuelans must choose between 'capitalism, which is the road to hell, or socialism, for those who want to build the kingdom of God here on earth.'"
Where did I say Venezuela is a communist country? I was speaking specifically of Chavez. He may not now be classified as a communist, but read more about him.
Chavez is an extreme leftist populist, and a Castro-admirer[1]. He wants to mold Venezuela into a new Cuba, but with the help of their oil supply.
They pay payroll taxes, social security, workmans comp, basically anything that gets deducted from your paycheck. They also pay to register their cars and pay taxes on them. Plus local wage taxes.
What part of "illegal aliens" don't you understand? I was specifically talking about illegal aliens. Illegal aliens do not pay payroll taxes, social security, workman's comp, or anything else because they do not earn a legal paycheck, because it is against the law to hire illegal aliens. This means if you are employing an illegal alien, you are breaking the law, and contrary to your statement, you are not collecting any of the taxes you mentioned.
The free eye surgery, however motivated, was a humanitarian act.
Your statement is illogical. If Chavez wasn't motivated by a concern for human welfare, then it would not be a humanitarian act.
For example, if he was only offering it to make people without insurance think communism is a good idea, then it is not a humanitarian act, it is a political act.
Perhaps you meant to say, however motivated, the offer may end up benefiting people. That may be true.
Why, are we stealing it from Mexico? Ohhhh we're paying for it, uh huh... yeah and that's bad for Mexico how?
all the cheap labour you are getting from them
The labor isn't cheap when you factor in two things:
(1) Illegal aliens don't pay taxes, but they benefit from the taxes others pay. IOW they put a social burden on the system and they don't help pay for it. (Yet another reason to support the FairTax, so that everybody contributes regardless of their status as a citizen.)
(2) If they weren't illegally in the country occupying that job, a legal American WOULD fill the role.
Don't get me wrong, I don't mind immigrants, they're what made the USA great, but it needs to be LEGAL immigration, and you need to pay taxes if you're going to live here.
Ummm, yeah, I wonder if Chavez is really interested in helping the US, or if he is more interested in turning poor people into communists? I know this sounds like some crazy idea, but the last paragraph of the article is interesting:
"Last week, Chavez offered discount gasoline to poor Americans suffering from high oil prices and on Sunday offered free eye surgery for Americans without access to health care."
Why in the hell would you choose a dull career like forensic investigation...
As opposed to an exciting career, like computer programming?
Seriously, I do a lot of programming as part of my job, and perhaps the most fun I have at work is when some luser decides to fuck with us and I get assigned to track down as much information as possible about this person's activity on our network.
If I ever had to find another job, I'd seriously consider getting into computer forensics, or the FBI computer investigation division.
Just because you don't go make an arrest doesn't mean your discoveries won't directly lead to an arrest. And usually the best kind... when the loser is least expecting it, because they didn't think anyone was sharp enough on the other end of the line.
A 'blog' is someone's personal journal, which is on the Internet.
Where on earth did you get this definition?
blog is short for web log. That's it. It doesn't have to be a "personal journal."
Slashdot is just a normal forum, with the discussions attached to news stories.
Wrong. A "normal forum" is one in which you or I could start a new post and everyone can contribute to it. Slashdot is a blog in every sense. A small group of people control posts that appear on the front page in reverse chronological order, and which other people can comment on.
Try searching for some definition of the word blog and see if you can still argue slashdot is not a blog.
Slashdot Mirror
Great. Pay-as-you-go policing and a subscription-only Army (haven't paid? fight your own war).
Forget for the moment that defense is one of the few things the federal government is actually charged with doing (by the Constitution).
I notice you left out ambulances/emergency services. Many ambulances, most perhaps, are commercial services, not government run.
Public education is not "free," it is paid for by taxpayers like me, and squandered by people who do not appreciate it because they don't have to work to pay for it. Those that really do appreciate it would be able to receive education through charitable organizations if people were giving less money to the government, and had more available to donate.
You have all these "underpaid" public school teachers, many of whom are not good and/or qualified for the jobs, trying to teach a bunch of kids, many of whom do everything in their power to avoid school/work. This problem has arisen because the government is running the school system. Period. No, I am definitely not happy about our "free education" system. It's fucked.
You don't think the money the federal government is spending rescuing Louisians from the roofs of their houses isn't being wisely spent?
Should we spend the money and get it done? Yes. Is it wisely spent? No. There was a mandatory evacuation in most parts. Those people should not have been there. That's why so many are dying. Maybe next time they'll heed the warnings. (Maybe we can stop subsidizing flood insurance with taxpayer money, too... let them pay for the risks they are taking by living in a flood plain.)
That being said, the two things you mentioned are two things that the federal government is SUPPOSED TO DO. Libertarians don't have a problem funding those types of gov't activities.
You, however, conveniently ignore all the money that is wasted on pork barrel spending and useless social programs, loopholes for lobbyists, etc.
Read some of the studies on this site, a non-partisan site, and tell me if you honestly still think the government is spending money wisely:
http://www.cagw.org/
Again, you are missing my point. I never said businesses operate because they are noble! Obviously that is not true of 99% of all businesses. I am talking about the idea that there is a mutual benefit to companies and people. This is a point lost on most of slashdot readers, who like to think of companies as evil, to simplify their worldview.
There's nothing noble about me exchanging money for groceries, and there's nothing noble about my employer paying me for my time. It's a business transaction, period.
You totally missed my point. You are describing the end result transactions. No, those aren't noble.
The fact that there is a company out there that is enabling you to purchase all the goods and services you want and need is noble. The fact that your employer took the initiative to create a company that creates products/services and employs people is noble.
So businesses don't knowingly do that.
Yes they do, they just pay them under the table.
Illegal aliens usually use fraudulent SSN's and other forged documents to get work. So the taxes, social security, etc generally are still collected.
No, most illegal aliens find illegal work where they are paid under the table.
I think your comparison of paying employees to helping people in dire need is slightly ridiculous.
Is it? Without corporations paying people, those people would be unemployed or looking for work.
Since when is employing people not a noble idea?
But what can I expect from some one who obviously feels the need to liberal bash when ever they can.
Don't worry, I bash both sides equally well... I'm a Libertarian.
No, we're mad at you for being a prick who thought he'd be smug and take the "what have you done" route, and it failed miserably.
I love it. A bunch of true pricks get on slashdot and bitch about a company that is offering assistance, and anyone that calls them on it is called a prick. This thread just gets funnier and funnier the more I think about it.
Wow, he donated what he could afford. So did I.
Using his and your logic, let me ask, why didn't he max out his credit card to help even more? Take vacation from work and fly to LA to help? Drive to the corner hospital and donate blood? Why didn't his employer donate more money?
The point is, T-Mobile is doing something. Why bitch about it?
As if a company wouldn't go for cheap PR. Goodness, no, not those innocent corporate angels.
This is beside the point entirely. Every company and person that publicly contributes money to an effort knows they will get good PR in return. So what? Does that diminish the net effect of their help?
Only on Slashdot, luckily, where the real world is far, far away.
"make Israel safe by killing all Muslims."
e ws/2005/08/12/wiran12.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/08/1 2/ixportaltop.html
The difference between what I wrote and what you wrote is that one of them is based in reality.
Reality: For years the Foreign Ministry in Tehran was draped with a 40-foot banner proclaiming that "Israel must burn."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/n
Reality: America has millions of peace-loving Muslims living in our country, many are citizens.
Reality: We have only used nuclear weapons twice, both in Japan, to end World War II.
Now try to present any facts to back up your point of view. You cannot do it, because your point of view is illogical. We are targeting insurgents and terrorists. Obviously many of them are Muslims. That does not mean we are targeting Muslims. To say we are is to use a logical fallacy.
Which is amazing if you think about it, not only do they donate the most needed resource (potable water) immediately, they actually hurt their production to do it. It's amazing, a corporation that does the Right thing.
I agree, it's great of them to do it, my previous joke about their product notwithstanding.
However, it's definitely not "amazing" for a corporation to do "the right thing." Corporations do the right thing every day: they create good and services you use, they pay employees, they earn money for stockholders like you and me, they often donate some of their proceeds to charities.
Sadly, there are many on slashdot who would like to pretend CORPORATIONS == BAD based on how a few corporations operate.
That'd be like me thinking all liberals are morons based on just what Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Ted Kennedy do.
Well, asshole
Priceless.
You're mad at me because you didn't like someone criticizing you for not doing enough to help the victims of Katrina, when in fact you are doing something.
Sound familiar?
PLEASE can we stop linking to the entire stupid hierarchy of news.com.com.com.com, zdnet, cnet and other stupid useless sites like that? Schneier is a big boy, he can handle /. - and if not, there's always coral.
I think we should link to both.
While unlikely (at CNET), it is possible that a news organization would present both sides of the story in an unbiased fashion, whereas if you just link to Schneier, you'll be getting only his take on it.
It is one of those words when you first hear it you imagine this immense technology behind it. But no, it is a URL to an audio file, inserted into XML.
Jesus Christ. How many times does this stupid notion have to be corrected on Slashdot, where the readers are SUPPOSED to be just a WEE BIT smarter than the norm? (No, I'm not new here.)
Podcasting is not just "a link to an audio file in some XML". It is the ability for anyone, professional or amateur, to record an audio program in serial fashion, and allow someone to EASILY SUBSCRIBE to receive the latest version of the show in their favorite listening device.
Your description of it is like saying a website is just text that you can download via HTTP. While technically that is true, it is in how it is used that makes it new and unique. I may remind you, "the web" used to be a buzzword, until it became ubiquitous.
Say what you like about their "beer", Anheuser-Busch has a long history of switching their closest functional production line to canning water, and delivering it *right now*.
Are you sure they really switched anything in their production line?
[Tastes budweiser.]
[Tastes bottled water.]
Hmmm...
(JUST KIDDING!!!!)
How big of them.
[rest of bitch whine moan... snipped]
And what are you doing for the victims of Katrina?
Just curious.
Is ScionLife liable? Am I? Is Slashdot liable now that I've put it up here?
Liable for what? If you spoke the truth about them and can prove it, you have nothing to fear.
If you libeled the company, yes you are liable.
In my opinion, ScionLife and Slashdot would not liable for your libel, but could be liable if they were notified the information was libel and did not pull it (then again, only if you libeled them, which would really have to be proven in a court of law).
And finally, if someone spray paints a swastica on my garage door while I'm out of town and unable to remove it, am I liable for a hate crime?
The hate crime was committed against you, so why would you be liable for it? This is like asking if a company would be liable if a user libeled it on its own site. The analogy is bad.
(a) It wasn't "an attack"
(b) It wasn't the worst hurricane in history, or even the history of the U.S.
(c) This is a tech news site
Also, let me twist this around on you, Mr. Concerned. "What the hell is wrong with you? 1000 people died in a stampede in Iraq today, and you want to talk about a hurricane that killed a few hundred people? GET SOME PRIORITIES!"
since when is Venezuela a communist country?
And as an addendum to my other reply, I found this quote from wikipedia:
"[Chavez] said that Venezuelans must choose between 'capitalism, which is the road to hell, or socialism, for those who want to build the kingdom of God here on earth.'"
since when is Venezuela a communist country?
Where did I say Venezuela is a communist country? I was speaking specifically of Chavez. He may not now be classified as a communist, but read more about him.
Chavez is an extreme leftist populist, and a Castro-admirer[1]. He wants to mold Venezuela into a new Cuba, but with the help of their oil supply.
[1] BBC News profile of Chavez describes him as an "admirer of Fidel Castro's Cuba."
But neither do Americans in that case, so it's pretty much irrelevant...
So we deport the Americans that purposely cheat on their taxes.
Next.
They pay payroll taxes, social security, workmans comp, basically anything that gets deducted from your paycheck. They also pay to register their cars and pay taxes on them. Plus local wage taxes.
What part of "illegal aliens" don't you understand? I was specifically talking about illegal aliens. Illegal aliens do not pay payroll taxes, social security, workman's comp, or anything else because they do not earn a legal paycheck, because it is against the law to hire illegal aliens. This means if you are employing an illegal alien, you are breaking the law, and contrary to your statement, you are not collecting any of the taxes you mentioned.
The problem will only get worse, and there's no obvious solution.
No, there definitely is an obvious solution. However, most former New Orleans residents won't think "don't live on a flood plain" is a good one.
The free eye surgery, however motivated, was a humanitarian act.
Your statement is illogical. If Chavez wasn't motivated by a concern for human welfare, then it would not be a humanitarian act.
For example, if he was only offering it to make people without insurance think communism is a good idea, then it is not a humanitarian act, it is a political act.
Perhaps you meant to say, however motivated, the offer may end up benefiting people. That may be true.
In all the oil you are sucking from that country
Why, are we stealing it from Mexico? Ohhhh we're paying for it, uh huh... yeah and that's bad for Mexico how?
all the cheap labour you are getting from them
The labor isn't cheap when you factor in two things:
(1) Illegal aliens don't pay taxes, but they benefit from the taxes others pay. IOW they put a social burden on the system and they don't help pay for it. (Yet another reason to support the FairTax, so that everybody contributes regardless of their status as a citizen.)
(2) If they weren't illegally in the country occupying that job, a legal American WOULD fill the role.
Don't get me wrong, I don't mind immigrants, they're what made the USA great, but it needs to be LEGAL immigration, and you need to pay taxes if you're going to live here.
Ummm, yeah, I wonder if Chavez is really interested in helping the US, or if he is more interested in turning poor people into communists? I know this sounds like some crazy idea, but the last paragraph of the article is interesting:
"Last week, Chavez offered discount gasoline to poor Americans suffering from high oil prices and on Sunday offered free eye surgery for Americans without access to health care."
Call me skeptical.
Why in the hell would you choose a dull career like forensic investigation...
... when the loser is least expecting it, because they didn't think anyone was sharp enough on the other end of the line.
As opposed to an exciting career, like computer programming?
Seriously, I do a lot of programming as part of my job, and perhaps the most fun I have at work is when some luser decides to fuck with us and I get assigned to track down as much information as possible about this person's activity on our network.
If I ever had to find another job, I'd seriously consider getting into computer forensics, or the FBI computer investigation division.
Just because you don't go make an arrest doesn't mean your discoveries won't directly lead to an arrest. And usually the best kind
A 'blog' is someone's personal journal, which is on the Internet.
Where on earth did you get this definition?
blog is short for web log. That's it. It doesn't have to be a "personal journal."
Slashdot is just a normal forum, with the discussions attached to news stories.
Wrong. A "normal forum" is one in which you or I could start a new post and everyone can contribute to it. Slashdot is a blog in every sense. A small group of people control posts that appear on the front page in reverse chronological order, and which other people can comment on.
Try searching for some definition of the word blog and see if you can still argue slashdot is not a blog.