Except you would be wrong. Portland ia removing car lanes and replacing them with extra wide bike lanes. For an example, see NW 16th and Irving. Two lanes of traffic were replaced with one lane for cars and another for bikes. That is an area where people queue to get on the 405 freeway. Having a second car lane for people going to Burnside was a huge benefit as they could bypass the freeway queue. Oh well, the zero bikes we have seen use that new bike lane are totally worth the inconvenience.
"Well, if you've not been dis-incentivized enough by all the inconveniences, delays, costs, and annoyances we've created to cause you to decide to stop driving an evil Gaia-raping car into our city entirely, our job isn't done!" -- City of Portland & Associated Fruits, Nuts, and Flakes
The only real way out of this is either a new startup company catering to exactly 'our' crowd, or crowdfunding a desktop RISCV/J[2,4,6]/OpenSparc motherboard and processor combo (SOCKETED, not solder down. Lose a few watts, leave open future upgrades/replacements.)
The only way you'd be able to do that successfully would be to have your own nuclear-capable nation-state, and even then it would be dicey at best. All the 'Five-Eyes' nations and most of the rest of the West would be out to destroy such a project and those behind it. The governments of the West seem determined to weaken global network/computer security in order to be able to spy on anyone at any time for any reason, and damn the consequences.
Thank goodness my plans for the impending overthrow of Western civilization do not require secure networks or hardware.
Because that will get really confusing for people if you redefine words like that.
Maybe true, but redefining the common definitions of commonly-used words lets politicians and bureaucrats do an end-run around restrictions on government powers and scope. It depends on what the meaning of 'is', is. It's the foundation of modern US politics.
Okay, I get it, you like pain. Because that is the only reason why one would not use suitable clothing, lighter bicycles or clipless pedals. Most of the cyclists who use all these don't care how they look like, but they care about their comfort. Your argumentation is that only race drivers ought to use modern cars with power steering, synchronised gearbox, air condition and cruise control because you are come by just fine using a pre-war VW Beetle.
I don't know what you're talking about. None of the people I ride with wear spandex. I went to my bike shop and they didn't have any spandex riding clothing at all.
They had plenty of leather jackets, gloves, and boots with the 'Harley-Davidson' logo, however. Also, I don't understand why people get so upset when I ride on the bike trails.:D
If there aren't enough people to pay for it voluntarily, then it does not need to be built at all. Simple, eh?
But how will the politicians maintain and grow a huge entitlement-class of voters dependent on government (and said politicians) for their day-to-day existence?
I'm going to go ahead and say that you're a moron and a rationalist.
A natural reaction from somebody who has no knowledge of history or human nature, or ignores such for political/ideological reasons. Nothing but ad hominem attacks. All this talk of "supporting evidence" and not one citation/link.
Before you go spouting off about others being morons you need to do a great deal of self-reflection.
...terrorists only have to develop their own software, and you're worse off than before.
The politicians all know this, the point is that after that fact is "officially" discovered, it sets up their rationale for rolling out 'Trusted Computing" and requiring all internet providers only allow "trusted" devices running government-approved and locked-down software onto the internet.
Redistribution-based societies/economies (which is what UBI is...it takes from the productive and redistributes it to the non-productive) based around collectivist ideology almost always results in equality. The 99% are all equally poor with no escape from poverty realistically possible, and the elite 1% leadership live like royalty. Also, those currently-productive people will not remain productive. The blue-collar types in the former USSR had a saying; "We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us."
That's one of the major failings of all collectivist ideologies and typically results in their eventual collapse if a revolution or coup doesn't finish them first; They never account for, and typically totally ignore and/or attempt a frontal-assault upon, basic human nature.
They put enormous power over an entire nation into the hands of a small group of individuals. Even if these leaders don't start out with bad intentions, we all know from the famous Stanford Prison experiment oft-cited here what happens psychologically to their behaviors and attitudes.
But many of the same people on both Left & Right who have cited such studies in comments here seem unable or unwilling to make the connection from those studies to the wisdom of handing a small group enormous power over a great many people when it comes to their ideological/political beliefs.
AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for
...how corporate america keeps its war chests of money overseas in tax havens... and suggest that maybe if they were paying their taxes like responsible citizens then maybe things wouldn't be so crappy.
If US corporate tax rates and other US corporate/business legal/regulatory-compliance costs were more on-par with foreign rates & costs, more of that money would stay in the US to be taxed for a net gain in revenue to public coffers and deposited in US financial institutions which provide capital for home loans, car loans, small business loans, etc etc.
The government is more focused on using taxation & regulation as social-engineering tools, not as *just* a tool to collect revenue to operate the government. The couldn't use tax & regulatory laws and policies to dis- or encourage societal behaviors if their taxes, etc were tied to sticking to the Laffer Curve.
"Revenue" is *not* the primary motivation behind federal tax & regulatory laws and policies. Control & manipulation of the population is what motivates and guides federal tax & regulatory laws & policies. Revenue generation is secondary at best.
...Is advocated for by people who either don't/can't/won't math, or they have an underlying political/ideological agenda
When they run out of other people's money to pay for it, are they simply going to toss those trillions onto the national debt? The dollar is internationally already in danger of being dropped as the international trade currency. How can anyone expect the US economy and the US dollar to avoid a collapse? Embark upon wars of annexation, colonialism, and empire-building as EU nations have done down through history?
Government isn't the solution, government is the problem!
...even going so far as to rule that money is speech...
Yes, because we all know that TV/radio stations and networks are happy to run people's political ads for free out of the goodness of their hearts.
Any sort of mass communication requires money. To ban/regulate money spent to communicate political/ideological ideas and positions is to effectively ban/regulate mass communications of political/ideological ideas and positions. Banning/regulating people pooling their resources to do the same is equally a ban/regulation of mass communications of political/ideological ideas and positions.
This attempt at an end-run around 1st-Amendment freedoms by attacking the wealth needed to spread political/ideological ideas is totally antithetical to US 1st-Amendment freedoms as they were originally intended and have been interpreted. The SCOTUS decision in Citizens United was proper, followed original intent, and was totally predictable unless one believed the Justices had all secretly went full-on SJW.
All these "personal sanctions" against individuals and corporations are nothing more than a good old bill of attainder - the hallmark of depots and tyrants everywhere. Government is supposed to rule by the enforcement of law, not by smears, allegations and witch hunts.
All true. But just try to talk about reducing the size & scope of the US Federal government here, and many of the same posters bemoaning the US government's overreach, power-grabbing, Amendment-violating ways will turn around and defend giving the government more power and tell you to move to Somalia if you want "anarchy", as if reducing the power and size of one of the largest and most powerful & invasive bureaucracies on the planet is the same as total anarchy.
A government large & powerful enough to give you all you need is large & powerful enough to take everything you have, including your wealth, your freedom, and your life and the lives of those you love, and eventually & inevitably will, as history has proven again and again. It's human nature.
Exactly. Or a simple book cipher [wikipedia.org], or steganography [wikipedia.org]. It's just too laughably easy for REAL terrorist types to communicate in perfect secrecy. What measures like this are about is for Law Enforcement(TM) types to trivially easily spy on the general populace.
This is the US intelligence services using the Australian intelligence services and Australian law as a monkey's-paw to do an end-run around US restrictions on their collection abilities. The '5-Eyes' sharing agreements means that US 4th-Amensment protections mean squat.
Hint, they are ALL corrupt and that is why a majority of people want smaller less powerful government.
So much this.
This is *exactly* why the authors of the US Constitution intended the Federal government to have very little power. They knew, as they'd seen over & over down through history, that positions of power *always* attract the worst types of people. It's human nature. It's unavoidable and inevitable whenever there are positions of great centralized power.
The only pragmatic & practical solution is to severely limit the amount of power the central government has so power-seekers are not as attracted and so that those who do attain positions can do only a limited amount of damage.
The overall concept has much in common with computer network architecture regarding the differences in vulnerability to subversion between a network consisting of a central server/CPU and 'dumb-terminals' compared to a network of stand-alone machines, each with it's own security and able to be vetted by the other machines sharing the network.
The US government is a network. It simply deals with government power instead of data. Many of the same principles that guide the formation of security rules & policies for a computer network apply equally to networks of power like the US government.
The Founders were genius-pioneers in architectural network security design.
I just don't understand how you don't see this practice as unethical of Spotify.
It would only be unethical if Spotify were misrepresenting the works. As long as they're not misrepresenting the works as created by another artist or an artist that does not exist, I see no problem. I'm sure they paid the people that made the tracks in question. Session and studio musicians gotta eat and keep the lights on, too. Heck, I'd consider laying down some tracks for Spotify to use as filler if the pay is decent. Why not? Just another paying contract gig. Bend like the reed when it meets the wind, Grasshopper. Adapt and use it as a new opportunity and resource.
[From TFS] But experts warn that the two studies, both published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, do not show that drinking coffee was behind the overall lower risk, pointing out that it could be that coffee drinkers are healthier in various ways or that those who are unwell drink less coffee.
I think an equally, if not more, valid question should be; Who paid for the "experts", who exactly are they, and why should we believe them over studies that have enough credibility to be published in the Annals of Internal Medicine (not exactly some sketchy 3rd-rate, no-name journal known for publishing junk-science)? Of course, I'm not saying the studies mean that coffee is necessarily all that good for you (but also possibly not so bad as well), but from the information in TFS there's no way to tell and equally no way to tell regarding who's funding either side and what their motivations might be.
Knowing that the two studies were both published in the AoIM and also *not* knowing who these "experts" are and what data and credentials they bring to the table, the scales tip towards "Studies in TFS may well have some validity, more/better studies needed."...As opposed to totally dismissing them under the advisement of unknown "experts".
Spotify reported $3 billion in revenue last year, so I imagine that they're doing okay. I'm sure that they'd say that they were on a shoe-string budget if you asked them though.
Large gross receipts do not equal large (or even any) profits. Hosting, data rates, licensing, royalties, compliance costs, lawyers...none of that is cheap, especially at the amounts, sizes, and amount of pure red tape involved. Much of that income is also from streaming non-US/RIAA artists and content as well.
Ultimately, the labels and RIAA-type organizations are doomed. The very nature of how people acquire and listen to music has totally changed and there's no putting the genie back in the bottle.
I do commend you for pulling in solid cash doing session work. It does speak to your skill. Charging a flat fee (at what I'm sure is a premium price) is smart too. Then you don't have to worry about whether the act is getting screwed over by his label or whatever.
I'm in a band that I perform live shows with. The session work is a nice side-income and networking resource. It allows more flexibility in choosing when & where we perform when the pressure to make money is lessened. It allows us to do things like play more benefits for homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and other similar charities & causes. I can so I do because if I don't, who will?
If the charts are ate up by a bunch of filler, there's no room for yooouuuuu
And the labels/RIAA/etc etc are to blame for putting streaming services in the position that they feel pressured to use filler to reduce costs so they can remain in operation and pay their people.
Besides, since I already do occasional session work, I may be able to get well-paying session gigs to produce their "filler".
Because flat tax is stupid: you either won't be able to finance the government because you're not getting enough money, or you'll tax low-income people to death and they'll revolt.
You sound like you'd be happier living in Somalia. Why don't you go there and see how your idiotic libertarian ideas work out?
There are a number of well thought-out flat tax proposals out there. Sorry, but the government needs a spending haircut. I think we'll survive if the feds aren't paying for studies that put shrimp on treadmills or spending untold amounts getting mud-puddles declared as endangered wetlands.
Why don't you go live in China or DPRK? They'll love your collectivist ideas there. Stop trying to turn the rest of the world into a socialist/communist shithole.
Musicians have to fight tooth and nail to make a dollar off their music and then someone comes along and makes it even tougher to get a dollar out of the fat cats. If people on Slashdot don't see the correlation to American programmers being replaced by H1B visa workers then they really aren't paying attention.
As a life-long musician, I call BS.
Technology and civilization have moved on, and so now selling recordings of music is simply no longer a valid business model, just like making buggy-whips after the rise of the automobile. If you're a musician and want to make a buck, play a live gig and sell merch and quick-burned discs of that show. Go on tour. Play casinos and cruise ships.
Performing live shows is where the money is at for musicians these days. Unless you're already so popular you're a household name, the labels and "music industry" organizations are nothing but a millstone around artist's necks bleeding them dry like bad loan-sharks.
Sorry labels/RIAA/etc etc. You had a good run but it's over now, the world and technology have moved on. Please have the grace to go quietly into that good night. It's not like you've got a lot of choice. You're done, regardless.
They do that because, for W-2 employees, your employer is paying part of those taxes for you (specifically, half of your FICA taxes, plus payroll taxes too). When you're self-employed, you don't have an employer chipping that stuff in, so you have to pay it yourself.
If you don't like it, you should lobby the government to take the entire FICA deduction out of your paycheck.
How about instead we move to a flat tax and private individual retirement/disability savings accounts and do away with the IRS and the Social Security Agency? I like that idea better.
Also, if someone is self-employed, they have additional self-employment taxes.
Yes, because God knows, we certainly don't need people encouraged to work for themselves! Then the government wouldn't be able to take what it wants from your paycheck before you get it and know to the penny how much money you have! Oh, the horror!
This is the first I'm hearing that "treating traffic equally" means no encryption, do you have a source?
The FCC is claiming the power to regulate & enforce "Net Neutrality" by including the internet under Title-II along with telecom/phone companies. One of the provisions under Title-II is for CALEA compliance.
This is not some secret tinfoil-hat stuff, it's all quite open for anyone who looks. It's just that nobody who wants what the politicians call NN, including the MSM, wants to talk about it. Understandable on their part, as it's not exactly a selling-point for the public, especially post-Snowden.
Clearly, they're trying to get this through for the ISPs and doing as little as possible to meet the letter of the law in attempt to keep it under the radar.
So, you want the interwebs all wrapped up in Title-II so the internet and all your devices will be mandated by law to be CALEA-compliant and accessible to law enforcement (ie no strong encryption allowed and backdoors baked-in)?
Slashdot Mirror
Except you would be wrong. Portland ia removing car lanes and replacing them with extra wide bike lanes. For an example, see NW 16th and Irving. Two lanes of traffic were replaced with one lane for cars and another for bikes. That is an area where people queue to get on the 405 freeway. Having a second car lane for people going to Burnside was a huge benefit as they could bypass the freeway queue. Oh well, the zero bikes we have seen use that new bike lane are totally worth the inconvenience.
"Well, if you've not been dis-incentivized enough by all the inconveniences, delays, costs, and annoyances we've created to cause you to decide to stop driving an evil Gaia-raping car into our city entirely, our job isn't done!" -- City of Portland & Associated Fruits, Nuts, and Flakes
Strat
The only real way out of this is either a new startup company catering to exactly 'our' crowd, or crowdfunding a desktop RISCV/J[2,4,6]/OpenSparc motherboard and processor combo (SOCKETED, not solder down. Lose a few watts, leave open future upgrades/replacements.)
The only way you'd be able to do that successfully would be to have your own nuclear-capable nation-state, and even then it would be dicey at best. All the 'Five-Eyes' nations and most of the rest of the West would be out to destroy such a project and those behind it. The governments of the West seem determined to weaken global network/computer security in order to be able to spy on anyone at any time for any reason, and damn the consequences.
Thank goodness my plans for the impending overthrow of Western civilization do not require secure networks or hardware.
Strat
Because that will get really confusing for people if you redefine words like that.
Maybe true, but redefining the common definitions of commonly-used words lets politicians and bureaucrats do an end-run around restrictions on government powers and scope. It depends on what the meaning of 'is', is. It's the foundation of modern US politics.
Why do you hate America and Freedom?
Strat
Okay, I get it, you like pain. Because that is the only reason why one would not use suitable clothing, lighter bicycles or clipless pedals. Most of the cyclists who use all these don't care how they look like, but they care about their comfort. Your argumentation is that only race drivers ought to use modern cars with power steering, synchronised gearbox, air condition and cruise control because you are come by just fine using a pre-war VW Beetle.
I don't know what you're talking about. None of the people I ride with wear spandex. I went to my bike shop and they didn't have any spandex riding clothing at all.
They had plenty of leather jackets, gloves, and boots with the 'Harley-Davidson' logo, however. Also, I don't understand why people get so upset when I ride on the bike trails. :D
Strat
If there aren't enough people to pay for it voluntarily, then it does not need to be built at all. Simple, eh?
But how will the politicians maintain and grow a huge entitlement-class of voters dependent on government (and said politicians) for their day-to-day existence?
Think of the incumbents, you insensitive clod! /s
Strat
I'm going to go ahead and say that you're a moron and a rationalist.
A natural reaction from somebody who has no knowledge of history or human nature, or ignores such for political/ideological reasons. Nothing but ad hominem attacks. All this talk of "supporting evidence" and not one citation/link.
Before you go spouting off about others being morons you need to do a great deal of self-reflection.
Strat
...terrorists only have to develop their own software, and you're worse off than before.
The politicians all know this, the point is that after that fact is "officially" discovered, it sets up their rationale for rolling out 'Trusted Computing" and requiring all internet providers only allow "trusted" devices running government-approved and locked-down software onto the internet.
Strat
Redistribution-based societies/economies (which is what UBI is...it takes from the productive and redistributes it to the non-productive) based around collectivist ideology almost always results in equality. The 99% are all equally poor with no escape from poverty realistically possible, and the elite 1% leadership live like royalty. Also, those currently-productive people will not remain productive. The blue-collar types in the former USSR had a saying; "We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us."
That's one of the major failings of all collectivist ideologies and typically results in their eventual collapse if a revolution or coup doesn't finish them first; They never account for, and typically totally ignore and/or attempt a frontal-assault upon, basic human nature.
They put enormous power over an entire nation into the hands of a small group of individuals. Even if these leaders don't start out with bad intentions, we all know from the famous Stanford Prison experiment oft-cited here what happens psychologically to their behaviors and attitudes.
But many of the same people on both Left & Right who have cited such studies in comments here seem unable or unwilling to make the connection from those studies to the wisdom of handing a small group enormous power over a great many people when it comes to their ideological/political beliefs.
Strat
[Trophies for Everyone!]
Get PAID for EXISTING!!
Yay socialism.... :-\
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for
...how corporate america keeps its war chests of money overseas in tax havens ... and suggest that maybe if they were paying their taxes like responsible citizens then maybe things wouldn't be so crappy.
If US corporate tax rates and other US corporate/business legal/regulatory-compliance costs were more on-par with foreign rates & costs, more of that money would stay in the US to be taxed for a net gain in revenue to public coffers and deposited in US financial institutions which provide capital for home loans, car loans, small business loans, etc etc.
The government is more focused on using taxation & regulation as social-engineering tools, not as *just* a tool to collect revenue to operate the government. The couldn't use tax & regulatory laws and policies to dis- or encourage societal behaviors if their taxes, etc were tied to sticking to the Laffer Curve.
"Revenue" is *not* the primary motivation behind federal tax & regulatory laws and policies. Control & manipulation of the population is what motivates and guides federal tax & regulatory laws & policies. Revenue generation is secondary at best.
Strat
...Is advocated for by people who either don't/can't/won't math, or they have an underlying political/ideological agenda
When they run out of other people's money to pay for it, are they simply going to toss those trillions onto the national debt? The dollar is internationally already in danger of being dropped as the international trade currency. How can anyone expect the US economy and the US dollar to avoid a collapse? Embark upon wars of annexation, colonialism, and empire-building as EU nations have done down through history?
Government isn't the solution, government is the problem!
Strat
...even going so far as to rule that money is speech...
Yes, because we all know that TV/radio stations and networks are happy to run people's political ads for free out of the goodness of their hearts.
Any sort of mass communication requires money. To ban/regulate money spent to communicate political/ideological ideas and positions is to effectively ban/regulate mass communications of political/ideological ideas and positions. Banning/regulating people pooling their resources to do the same is equally a ban/regulation of mass communications of political/ideological ideas and positions.
This attempt at an end-run around 1st-Amendment freedoms by attacking the wealth needed to spread political/ideological ideas is totally antithetical to US 1st-Amendment freedoms as they were originally intended and have been interpreted. The SCOTUS decision in Citizens United was proper, followed original intent, and was totally predictable unless one believed the Justices had all secretly went full-on SJW.
Strat
All these "personal sanctions" against individuals and corporations are nothing more than a good old bill of attainder - the hallmark of depots and tyrants everywhere. Government is supposed to rule by the enforcement of law, not by smears, allegations and witch hunts.
All true. But just try to talk about reducing the size & scope of the US Federal government here, and many of the same posters bemoaning the US government's overreach, power-grabbing, Amendment-violating ways will turn around and defend giving the government more power and tell you to move to Somalia if you want "anarchy", as if reducing the power and size of one of the largest and most powerful & invasive bureaucracies on the planet is the same as total anarchy.
A government large & powerful enough to give you all you need is large & powerful enough to take everything you have, including your wealth, your freedom, and your life and the lives of those you love, and eventually & inevitably will, as history has proven again and again. It's human nature.
Strat
Exactly. Or a simple book cipher [wikipedia.org], or steganography [wikipedia.org]. It's just too laughably easy for REAL terrorist types to communicate in perfect secrecy. What measures like this are about is for Law Enforcement(TM) types to trivially easily spy on the general populace.
This is the US intelligence services using the Australian intelligence services and Australian law as a monkey's-paw to do an end-run around US restrictions on their collection abilities. The '5-Eyes' sharing agreements means that US 4th-Amensment protections mean squat.
Strat
Hint, they are ALL corrupt and that is why a majority of people want smaller less powerful government.
So much this.
This is *exactly* why the authors of the US Constitution intended the Federal government to have very little power. They knew, as they'd seen over & over down through history, that positions of power *always* attract the worst types of people. It's human nature. It's unavoidable and inevitable whenever there are positions of great centralized power.
The only pragmatic & practical solution is to severely limit the amount of power the central government has so power-seekers are not as attracted and so that those who do attain positions can do only a limited amount of damage.
The overall concept has much in common with computer network architecture regarding the differences in vulnerability to subversion between a network consisting of a central server/CPU and 'dumb-terminals' compared to a network of stand-alone machines, each with it's own security and able to be vetted by the other machines sharing the network.
The US government is a network. It simply deals with government power instead of data. Many of the same principles that guide the formation of security rules & policies for a computer network apply equally to networks of power like the US government.
The Founders were genius-pioneers in architectural network security design.
Strat
I just don't understand how you don't see this practice as unethical of Spotify.
It would only be unethical if Spotify were misrepresenting the works. As long as they're not misrepresenting the works as created by another artist or an artist that does not exist, I see no problem. I'm sure they paid the people that made the tracks in question. Session and studio musicians gotta eat and keep the lights on, too. Heck, I'd consider laying down some tracks for Spotify to use as filler if the pay is decent. Why not? Just another paying contract gig. Bend like the reed when it meets the wind, Grasshopper. Adapt and use it as a new opportunity and resource.
Strat
I think an equally, if not more, valid question should be; Who paid for the "experts", who exactly are they, and why should we believe them over studies that have enough credibility to be published in the Annals of Internal Medicine (not exactly some sketchy 3rd-rate, no-name journal known for publishing junk-science)? Of course, I'm not saying the studies mean that coffee is necessarily all that good for you (but also possibly not so bad as well), but from the information in TFS there's no way to tell and equally no way to tell regarding who's funding either side and what their motivations might be.
Knowing that the two studies were both published in the AoIM and also *not* knowing who these "experts" are and what data and credentials they bring to the table, the scales tip towards "Studies in TFS may well have some validity, more/better studies needed."...As opposed to totally dismissing them under the advisement of unknown "experts".
Strat
Spotify reported $3 billion in revenue last year, so I imagine that they're doing okay. I'm sure that they'd say that they were on a shoe-string budget if you asked them though.
Large gross receipts do not equal large (or even any) profits. Hosting, data rates, licensing, royalties, compliance costs, lawyers...none of that is cheap, especially at the amounts, sizes, and amount of pure red tape involved. Much of that income is also from streaming non-US/RIAA artists and content as well.
Ultimately, the labels and RIAA-type organizations are doomed. The very nature of how people acquire and listen to music has totally changed and there's no putting the genie back in the bottle.
I do commend you for pulling in solid cash doing session work. It does speak to your skill. Charging a flat fee (at what I'm sure is a premium price) is smart too. Then you don't have to worry about whether the act is getting screwed over by his label or whatever.
I'm in a band that I perform live shows with. The session work is a nice side-income and networking resource. It allows more flexibility in choosing when & where we perform when the pressure to make money is lessened. It allows us to do things like play more benefits for homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and other similar charities & causes. I can so I do because if I don't, who will?
Strat
If the charts are ate up by a bunch of filler, there's no room for yooouuuuu
And the labels/RIAA/etc etc are to blame for putting streaming services in the position that they feel pressured to use filler to reduce costs so they can remain in operation and pay their people.
Besides, since I already do occasional session work, I may be able to get well-paying session gigs to produce their "filler".
Strat
Because flat tax is stupid: you either won't be able to finance the government because you're not getting enough money, or you'll tax low-income people to death and they'll revolt.
You sound like you'd be happier living in Somalia. Why don't you go there and see how your idiotic libertarian ideas work out?
There are a number of well thought-out flat tax proposals out there. Sorry, but the government needs a spending haircut. I think we'll survive if the feds aren't paying for studies that put shrimp on treadmills or spending untold amounts getting mud-puddles declared as endangered wetlands.
Why don't you go live in China or DPRK? They'll love your collectivist ideas there. Stop trying to turn the rest of the world into a socialist/communist shithole.
Strat
Musicians have to fight tooth and nail to make a dollar off their music and then someone comes along and makes it even tougher to get a dollar out of the fat cats. If people on Slashdot don't see the correlation to American programmers being replaced by H1B visa workers then they really aren't paying attention.
As a life-long musician, I call BS.
Technology and civilization have moved on, and so now selling recordings of music is simply no longer a valid business model, just like making buggy-whips after the rise of the automobile. If you're a musician and want to make a buck, play a live gig and sell merch and quick-burned discs of that show. Go on tour. Play casinos and cruise ships.
Performing live shows is where the money is at for musicians these days. Unless you're already so popular you're a household name, the labels and "music industry" organizations are nothing but a millstone around artist's necks bleeding them dry like bad loan-sharks.
Sorry labels/RIAA/etc etc. You had a good run but it's over now, the world and technology have moved on. Please have the grace to go quietly into that good night. It's not like you've got a lot of choice. You're done, regardless.
Strat
They do that because, for W-2 employees, your employer is paying part of those taxes for you (specifically, half of your FICA taxes, plus payroll taxes too). When you're self-employed, you don't have an employer chipping that stuff in, so you have to pay it yourself.
If you don't like it, you should lobby the government to take the entire FICA deduction out of your paycheck.
How about instead we move to a flat tax and private individual retirement/disability savings accounts and do away with the IRS and the Social Security Agency? I like that idea better.
Strat
Also, if someone is self-employed, they have additional self-employment taxes.
Yes, because God knows, we certainly don't need people encouraged to work for themselves! Then the government wouldn't be able to take what it wants from your paycheck before you get it and know to the penny how much money you have! Oh, the horror!
Strat
This is the first I'm hearing that "treating traffic equally" means no encryption, do you have a source?
The FCC is claiming the power to regulate & enforce "Net Neutrality" by including the internet under Title-II along with telecom/phone companies. One of the provisions under Title-II is for CALEA compliance.
This is not some secret tinfoil-hat stuff, it's all quite open for anyone who looks. It's just that nobody who wants what the politicians call NN, including the MSM, wants to talk about it. Understandable on their part, as it's not exactly a selling-point for the public, especially post-Snowden.
Strat
Clearly, they're trying to get this through for the ISPs and doing as little as possible to meet the letter of the law in attempt to keep it under the radar.
So, you want the interwebs all wrapped up in Title-II so the internet and all your devices will be mandated by law to be CALEA-compliant and accessible to law enforcement (ie no strong encryption allowed and backdoors baked-in)?
Be very careful what you wish for.
You just may get it.
Strat