The result is that they try to make us feel guilty for eating eggs, drinking milk and even chewing on imported fruits.
There is a difference between expressing a viewpoint you yourself truly believe and bullying others to express that viewpoint. Whether you believe them or not is entirely up to you.
Capitalism is good, the corporatism that America has spawned is bad.
With apologies to Winston Churchill, Capitalism is the worst form of economic system, except for all the others.
Capitalism is a tool. It is only as good or bad as the use it is put to. There is nothing magical about that causes it to only ever produce desirable results.
Knee jerk reactions are certainly popular among slashdot posters. For the rest of us, being informed about how immigration actually affects economic growth and wages is probably a good idea. Start with a conservative perspective, so you know you aren't getting a pro-immigrant bias:
Yes, there are. They are generally positive. But don't believe me. Have a look at what a conservative think tank has to say: http://www.hoover.org/research...
Just prosecute the ones that violate their visas and if they violated them to make money, asset strip them. How many Mexicans do you think would come here illegally if CBP or local law enforcement had an explicit grant to use civil asset forfeiture to take everything they own?
There's a minor problem with this plan. The ones who come here illegally? They don't have visas. That's what makes their coming here illegal. If they have a visa, then they came here legally.
Q: Why is divorce so expensive? A: Because it's worth it!
Of course, that means some people can't afford one.
PS: Your ability to understand that people who are not you could have desires, motivations, or values that you do not share is astonishingly low, even for a Slashdot poster.
AC beat me to it, and it is such an obvious conclusion that I'd feel silly repeating it. Then again, some DA's might even throw in conspiracy to commit murder, and consider your actions to be active participation in the planning.
Nonsense wrapped in a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible for the killers to be 100% responsible for their actions, and for those who assisted them to be responsible for their actions also. Try looking up "aiding and abetting" and "conspiracy" at your local law library.
By your reasoning, the terrorists on board the planes who crashed into the world trade center were solely responsible for their act. Osama bin Laden merely provided them with information, so he was completely guilt free.
I don't think anyone at all is denying the responsibility of the criminals. However, this does not exclude the possibility that there are additional persons responsible as well.
WTF does innovation have to do with *quality*? Answer: nothing.
If this is true, what possible reason is there to ever publish anything new? Readers can just reread the book they just finished.If you still want to give out awards, then just give the same awards out to the same titles every year.
Every answer so far: we have no fucking idea how to tell, with certainty, whether any object is conscious or not. We have a pretty good sliding scale of confidence (rocks: extremely unlikely, crawfish: fairly unlikely, other people: mostly certain (with exceptions), dolphins: ??).
We don't even have a solid definition of what consciousness is. How can you say with certainty whether something has a thing when you don't even know what that thing is?
Define "Human brain activity". Please explain how it can be differentiated from "squirrel brain activity", "snake brain activity", etc. Otherwise, this is a completely meaningless phrase.
(Ok, yes, one can rationalize that if someone is hurt in an uber accident, and they end up on the public welfare, that's somehow public subsidy, but that would be no different than if they had a catastrophic sidewalk accident with no insurance.)
The fact is, that risk is so tiny, people are willing to risk it.
Goddammit, the insurance companies are really ripping us off. Why are they charging so much more for car insurance than they do for standing on the sidewalk insurance?
Ok... can you please tell us where today there is a place with a "no blacks" sign with regards to getting photo IDs?
It is entirely within the realm of possibility for a policy to not have racist intent and still have a racist result. (Though in this particular case, there is certainly the appearance of intent.)
Or is there a place where there are certain requirements which all must meet, but somehow blacks are just too stupid/poor/lazy/etc to be able to meet them?
Let's assume that only one of the qualities you list can present an impediment. If blacks are on average more poor than non-blacks, is it possible that this is a result of racism? (Hint:yes).
Given the gatekeeper process involved in getting a candidate to appear on a ballot in most of the US (and certainly for any national office), your position is very much open to debate.
You are right, I was being a bit provincial. But pointing out the phones hardware capability still doesn't answer the question of whether it can connect to those services anywhere outside of Europe.
Since this story is about the introduction of the phone's availability in North America, the only relevant question is whether it is capable of connecting to 4G and 3G in North America. This information is not at all reflected in any of the links which you have provided. As has been discussed earlier in the thread, though the phone has 3G capabilities, this does not include the ability to connect to existing 3G networks in North America.
I would like to see what data you are analyzing for that conclusion. It seems to me the periods of highest economic growth rates have coincided with higher rates of union membership in the US, certainly higher than we see today. Correlation does not imply causation, but it would exclude your conclusion.
Of course, the idea of using evidence to reach conclusions rather than ideology may be foreign to you.
So you're saying the little link under the video that says "Hide/Show transcript" is half lying? Perhaps it should have read "Hide/Show some text partially related to the video"?
You know what? The internet was better/more informative/easier to use/more interesting/etc. etc. etc. before all these pay by ad sites started springing up. If they all go away, I don't see the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
So then they are either a taxi company, or their drivers are employees. Having neither of those be true is not one of the available options.
The result is that they try to make us feel guilty for eating eggs, drinking milk and even chewing on imported fruits.
There is a difference between expressing a viewpoint you yourself truly believe and bullying others to express that viewpoint. Whether you believe them or not is entirely up to you.
Capitalism is good, the corporatism that America has spawned is bad.
With apologies to Winston Churchill, Capitalism is the worst form of economic system, except for all the others.
Capitalism is a tool. It is only as good or bad as the use it is put to. There is nothing magical about that causes it to only ever produce desirable results.
Knee jerk reactions are certainly popular among slashdot posters. For the rest of us, being informed about how immigration actually affects economic growth and wages is probably a good idea. Start with a conservative perspective, so you know you aren't getting a pro-immigrant bias:
http://www.hoover.org/research...
I don't think you read the post I was replying to at all. I mean, I quoted it and everything:
prosecute the ones that violate their visas... How many Mexicans do you think would come here illegally
There are severe economic consequences of this.
Yes, there are. They are generally positive. But don't believe me. Have a look at what a conservative think tank has to say:
http://www.hoover.org/research...
Just prosecute the ones that violate their visas and if they violated them to make money, asset strip them. How many Mexicans do you think would come here illegally if CBP or local law enforcement had an explicit grant to use civil asset forfeiture to take everything they own?
There's a minor problem with this plan. The ones who come here illegally? They don't have visas. That's what makes their coming here illegal. If they have a visa, then they came here legally.
This reminds me of the old joke:
Q: Why is divorce so expensive?
A: Because it's worth it!
Of course, that means some people can't afford one.
PS: Your ability to understand that people who are not you could have desires, motivations, or values that you do not share is astonishingly low, even for a Slashdot poster.
But they succeed at this only if people actually choose to buy their products because they benefit
Patently false. Many branded products sell by convincing the consumer that a benefit exists, when in fact no benefit exists at all.
AC beat me to it, and it is such an obvious conclusion that I'd feel silly repeating it. Then again, some DA's might even throw in conspiracy to commit murder, and consider your actions to be active participation in the planning.
Nonsense wrapped in a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible for the killers to be 100% responsible for their actions, and for those who assisted them to be responsible for their actions also. Try looking up "aiding and abetting" and "conspiracy" at your local law library.
By your reasoning, the terrorists on board the planes who crashed into the world trade center were solely responsible for their act. Osama bin Laden merely provided them with information, so he was completely guilt free.
I don't think anyone at all is denying the responsibility of the criminals. However, this does not exclude the possibility that there are additional persons responsible as well.
WTF does innovation have to do with *quality*? Answer: nothing.
If this is true, what possible reason is there to ever publish anything new? Readers can just reread the book they just finished.If you still want to give out awards, then just give the same awards out to the same titles every year.
Every answer so far: we have no fucking idea how to tell, with certainty, whether any object is conscious or not. We have a pretty good sliding scale of confidence (rocks: extremely unlikely, crawfish: fairly unlikely, other people: mostly certain (with exceptions), dolphins: ??).
We don't even have a solid definition of what consciousness is. How can you say with certainty whether something has a thing when you don't even know what that thing is?
Define "Human brain activity". Please explain how it can be differentiated from "squirrel brain activity", "snake brain activity", etc. Otherwise, this is a completely meaningless phrase.
(Ok, yes, one can rationalize that if someone is hurt in an uber accident, and they end up on the public welfare, that's somehow public subsidy, but that would be no different than if they had a catastrophic sidewalk accident with no insurance.)
The fact is, that risk is so tiny, people are willing to risk it.
Goddammit, the insurance companies are really ripping us off. Why are they charging so much more for car insurance than they do for standing on the sidewalk insurance?
By any chance, have you also gotten any older in that time period?
Also, you are not a statistically significant sample size.
Ok... can you please tell us where today there is a place with a "no blacks" sign with regards to getting photo IDs?
It is entirely within the realm of possibility for a policy to not have racist intent and still have a racist result. (Though in this particular case, there is certainly the appearance of intent.)
Or is there a place where there are certain requirements which all must meet, but somehow blacks are just too stupid/poor/lazy/etc to be able to meet them?
Let's assume that only one of the qualities you list can present an impediment. If blacks are on average more poor than non-blacks, is it possible that this is a result of racism? (Hint:yes).
The whole voter fraud problem is itself a fraud.
Given the gatekeeper process involved in getting a candidate to appear on a ballot in most of the US (and certainly for any national office), your position is very much open to debate.
You are right, I was being a bit provincial. But pointing out the phones hardware capability still doesn't answer the question of whether it can connect to those services anywhere outside of Europe.
Since this story is about the introduction of the phone's availability in North America, the only relevant question is whether it is capable of connecting to 4G and 3G in North America. This information is not at all reflected in any of the links which you have provided. As has been discussed earlier in the thread, though the phone has 3G capabilities, this does not include the ability to connect to existing 3G networks in North America.
I would like to see what data you are analyzing for that conclusion. It seems to me the periods of highest economic growth rates have coincided with higher rates of union membership in the US, certainly higher than we see today. Correlation does not imply causation, but it would exclude your conclusion.
Of course, the idea of using evidence to reach conclusions rather than ideology may be foreign to you.
So you're saying the little link under the video that says "Hide/Show transcript" is half lying? Perhaps it should have read "Hide/Show some text partially related to the video"?
You know what? The internet was better/more informative/easier to use/more interesting/etc. etc. etc. before all these pay by ad sites started springing up. If they all go away, I don't see the problem.
A sincere thanks for the clarification.
OTOH, there is +5 informative post in this thread that claims the phone can do 3G. I guess I'll go do some research...