There is too great an incentive for companies to dream up potentially damaging and idiotic ideas in order to secure lucrative government contracts to carry them out. The company then makes a large profit from screwing with the environment in a big way.
It's the same mechanism that results in companies having an incentive to push the country into war; massive mega-contracts that result in huge gains to that company at the severe detriment of everyone else.
Huge dollars going into mega projects like carbon sequestering attract morally bankrupt companies like Bechtel, companies who would strip mine the entire Amazon if they could make it profitable. They put together a reasonable sounding proposal, submit it to the bumbling idiots who call themselves our leaders along with a fat bribe and then go about reaping enormous profit using our tax dollars to fuck up the planet.
There are few things that anger me more than the privatization of social responsibility.
Of course, when you use it be sure to spend ages trolling Internet forums. I know that's what *I'd* do if the Air Force's advanced research projects department gave me a time machine to play with.
That being said, people who spend ages arguing the point about whether or not that was a legitimate time traveler have totally missed the point of what he was saying; Stop and think about where we as a society are going.
"It looks like you are trying to fly a commercial airliner. Would you like me to: a) Make an announcement to passengers b) Call the stewardess for some more coffee c) Compensate for the incredibly high angle of attack"
That'll really foil spammers, because it is impossible to solve the AI problem from that angle as computers will never be as dumb as the average human.
"Hi, it looks like you are trying to eliminate a target. Would you like me to: a) Arm the weapons systems b) Initialize the targeting system c) Deploy ECM in case hostiles are nearby"
Oh, and what the hell does "US of China" mean? I think you were looking for "The democratic people's republic of America".
Democratic? Not by any meaningful definition of the word. People's? It's clear to all but the most ignorant of nationalistic delusional individuals that the US government hasn't been by the people, for the people or of the people for a very, very long time.
I would like to add my +1 to this sentiment. I have asked that question in many forms at many dinners, conferences and causal lunches, and almost every time I do, I essentially get called a commie and that's the end of the discussion.
The conflict of interest when public goods (such as infrastructure, health care, education, defense etc) are handled by the private sector are so palpable that it boggles the mind that there is even a counter argument to the idea that the government should handle all public works, let alone that the counter argument is the current mode of operation for the world.
Here's another public service that many often overlook, that I think at the moment is getting a lot of scrutiny: finance.
Money, its creation and its destruction is such a fundamentally public function, so intimately at the core of public activity, that I cannot understand how the fact that that private firms get to do as they please with it with no accountability is just ignored.
Ignored that is, until recently. Lets see how this experiment with fundamentalist marketism in the US ends up. I'm betting "not well".
IMO, these countries are far more damaged by their own amateurish and corrupt governments than foreign companies,
And how do these amateurish tinpot dictators get into power and stay there? The best leaders outside the first world, those who have had the greatest positive impact upon their nations are deliberately sabotaged by first world subterfuge and underhanded unfair play. Prime example: the assassination of Salvadore Allende in Chile in the 70s. It's the only event that's not in dispute, but if you believe it was an isolated incident and that that sort of thing doesn't go on any more then you're not being realistic. There's also the Nicraguan bay mining incident as well, which just came to my mind.
Economic growth is the only real way to significantly and permanently improve the lives of people in the third world, and foreign investment is the only way that's going to happen. It's terrible that countries have been abused in the past, but the idea that western interests are only in these countries to rape and pillage under the banner of capitalism is thankfully a largely defunct notion.
Defunct notion? Explain to me how IMF loans that are granted in the name of "development" but come with a long list of conditions such as that infrastructure development must be contracted out to western corporations such as Bechtel is anything *but* modern pillaging.
Explain to me how it is not pillaging when the debt forgiveness granted on these loans is only tied to conditions such as ownership in national assets such as tollways and electricity grids.
The best and clearest example of direct pillaging is the Diego Garcia incident. Go look it up before you use the words "raping and pillaging" in a pompous way that makes it look like that doesn't go on any more.
Afghanistan has no oil and only limited use as a pipeline transit route, which is probably why the US has apparently put it on the backburner.
Afghanistan does not have "limited use" as a pipeline route, it is absolutely crucial in the global petrochemical strategy, but lets not bother arguing that one as its pretty complex.
Working in a third world sweatshop isn't particularly pleasant, but it is clearly preferable to their lot without western investment, or they simply wouldn't do it.
I get very angry when people glibly say rubbish like this. Have you been to this third world you seem so eager to pontificate on? I've been there. I've lived with those people. I've been to a sweatshop to see what its like, spoken to the foremen and the workers.
Sweatshops are the most demeaning, soul crushing places imaginable, and people only work there because their options are either that or death. This is no option at all. The existence of the sweatshop economy is the result of foreign investment interests deliberately influencing local politics and economics in such a way that a large pool of otherwise unemployed people is created who thus have no option *but* to work in a sweatshop.
Foreign investment is not always a good thing, in fact for the third world it's rarely a good thing. Best example of a clearly exploitative attempt at foreign investment is the water infrastructure deal Bechtel attempted to ram through the government of Bolivia. Again, don't be silly enough to think that that is an isolated incident.
Slashdot Mirror
The real problem is the business of the process.
There is too great an incentive for companies to dream up potentially damaging and idiotic ideas in order to secure lucrative government contracts to carry them out. The company then makes a large profit from screwing with the environment in a big way.
It's the same mechanism that results in companies having an incentive to push the country into war; massive mega-contracts that result in huge gains to that company at the severe detriment of everyone else.
Huge dollars going into mega projects like carbon sequestering attract morally bankrupt companies like Bechtel, companies who would strip mine the entire Amazon if they could make it profitable. They put together a reasonable sounding proposal, submit it to the bumbling idiots who call themselves our leaders along with a fat bribe and then go about reaping enormous profit using our tax dollars to fuck up the planet.
There are few things that anger me more than the privatization of social responsibility.
Must be the admin for a Windows server.
And if they're really intelligent robots, they'll get the hell off that damn lawn before they get hit with yesterdays rolled up newspaper.
That could just as easily be a factor of two million. Or zero. Or anything, really.
To me, the appropriate value of Bs in this equation is precisely zero.
I think the more important thing to note here is the irony in the fact that published research has found that most published research is false.
Of course, when you use it be sure to spend ages trolling Internet forums. I know that's what *I'd* do if the Air Force's advanced research projects department gave me a time machine to play with.
That being said, people who spend ages arguing the point about whether or not that was a legitimate time traveler have totally missed the point of what he was saying; Stop and think about where we as a society are going.
The real reason:
"It looks like you are trying to fly a commercial airliner. Would you like me to:
a) Make an announcement to passengers
b) Call the stewardess for some more coffee
c) Compensate for the incredibly high angle of attack"
That'll really foil spammers, because it is impossible to solve the AI problem from that angle as computers will never be as dumb as the average human.
Don't jump the gun. Netcraft hasn't confirmed it.
Either that or they convinced the USPTO to grant them a patent on photosynthesis.
Mods must have, like, no sense of humor. Either that or they're, like, computers or something.
"Hi, it looks like you are trying to eliminate a target. Would you like me to:
a) Arm the weapons systems
b) Initialize the targeting system
c) Deploy ECM in case hostiles are nearby"
Yea, we really need to be more sensitive to semiconductors of color. Say, 100 to 500 times more sensitive.
Democratic? Not by any meaningful definition of the word. People's? It's clear to all but the most ignorant of nationalistic delusional individuals that the US government hasn't been by the people, for the people or of the people for a very, very long time.
You can't treat post-traumatic stress with penicillin.
I would like to add my +1 to this sentiment. I have asked that question in many forms at many dinners, conferences and causal lunches, and almost every time I do, I essentially get called a commie and that's the end of the discussion.
The conflict of interest when public goods (such as infrastructure, health care, education, defense etc) are handled by the private sector are so palpable that it boggles the mind that there is even a counter argument to the idea that the government should handle all public works, let alone that the counter argument is the current mode of operation for the world.
Here's another public service that many often overlook, that I think at the moment is getting a lot of scrutiny: finance.
Money, its creation and its destruction is such a fundamentally public function, so intimately at the core of public activity, that I cannot understand how the fact that that private firms get to do as they please with it with no accountability is just ignored.
Ignored that is, until recently. Lets see how this experiment with fundamentalist marketism in the US ends up. I'm betting "not well".
Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Your strange use of the word "Empathy" leads me to believe that you would not pass a Voigt-Kampff test.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Also, it's not a proper noun, so it's not whoever you think it is either.
Nagios is only obscure if you are not a network admin, Linux geek or data center operator.
So the real question is; what are you doing here?
+1 Reference to one of my favorite movies of all time!
Not even Microsoft is that cruel and unusual, surely?
And how do these amateurish tinpot dictators get into power and stay there? The best leaders outside the first world, those who have had the greatest positive impact upon their nations are deliberately sabotaged by first world subterfuge and underhanded unfair play. Prime example: the assassination of Salvadore Allende in Chile in the 70s. It's the only event that's not in dispute, but if you believe it was an isolated incident and that that sort of thing doesn't go on any more then you're not being realistic. There's also the Nicraguan bay mining incident as well, which just came to my mind.
Defunct notion? Explain to me how IMF loans that are granted in the name of "development" but come with a long list of conditions such as that infrastructure development must be contracted out to western corporations such as Bechtel is anything *but* modern pillaging.
Explain to me how it is not pillaging when the debt forgiveness granted on these loans is only tied to conditions such as ownership in national assets such as tollways and electricity grids.
The best and clearest example of direct pillaging is the Diego Garcia incident. Go look it up before you use the words "raping and pillaging" in a pompous way that makes it look like that doesn't go on any more.
Afghanistan does not have "limited use" as a pipeline route, it is absolutely crucial in the global petrochemical strategy, but lets not bother arguing that one as its pretty complex.
I get very angry when people glibly say rubbish like this. Have you been to this third world you seem so eager to pontificate on? I've been there. I've lived with those people. I've been to a sweatshop to see what its like, spoken to the foremen and the workers.
Sweatshops are the most demeaning, soul crushing places imaginable, and people only work there because their options are either that or death. This is no option at all. The existence of the sweatshop economy is the result of foreign investment interests deliberately influencing local politics and economics in such a way that a large pool of otherwise unemployed people is created who thus have no option *but* to work in a sweatshop.
Foreign investment is not always a good thing, in fact for the third world it's rarely a good thing. Best example of a clearly exploitative attempt at foreign investment is the water infrastructure deal Bechtel attempted to ram through the government of Bolivia. Again, don't be silly enough to think that that is an isolated incident.
Defunct notion indeed.
I would agree with but I don't your point.
What, you mean like drugs or an illegal firearm?
Depends. Are we talking 2009 dollars or 2010 dollars?