I personally don't give a shit who I buy it from. If somebody has it at a price I'm willing to pay, I'll buy it. I don't see what the problem is in the first place. Scalpers aren't doing anything wrong, as far as I can tell.
Why should it be illegal? Why should I care about this? If something is too expensive because the ticket face price is too much, or the reseller's price is too high, I don't go. I don't see what the problem is.
SQL Server is free up to 10 GB. After that, I'll probably still pay for SQL Server. MySQL and MariaDB are toys, and there's nothing that PostGre offers that SQL Server doesn't.
The regulations are atrocious too. A sane tax rate is only part of the picture.
I hear this from Fox News drones all the time. I run a business, and I'm not familiar with any of these burdensome regulations. Care to be more specific?
Exactly. It is the government's job to force people at gun point to pay for good and services that you want.
Yes, it's called "taxes", dipshit. Did you personally pay for the utility lines that delivered the electricity that allowed you to write that moronic post?
What happens when the government kills one of my relatives through penny-pinching on diagnostic tests or it decides that expensive cancer drug keeping you alive is just too expensive?
With the government, you have an appeal process. When it's private insurance, you're fucked.
Why should Amazon care? Nobody is going to stop shopping there. People just want their cheap shit, and don't care who they do business with. If most people could save $0.50 buying their toilet paper from known child rapists, they would.
There are practical reasons for having the federal government involved. Primarily, certain states (TX, AL), would be teaching kids about Jeebus and other Magical Sky Zombies if left to their own devices. The Constitution is nice in theory, but there are limits to its practicality.
The problem is that nobody is selling their own ads. It's that simple. It's these stupid shitty ad networks (Google, included) that are the problem. And I'm always going to block them. If web sites want to sell their OWN advertising and host it from their OWN web sites, then I'd have absolutely no problem. But, what web site wants to employ salespeople and (ad) designers when you can just copy and paste a line of code into a web site? Well, I think the ones that continue to do that into the future are the ones that aren't going to make money. Whether they stick around or not is up to them. I wouldn't mind having a pre-AOL web back, personally. But sites that rely on ad networks for revenue are going to start drying up as more and more people block these stupid fucking ad networks. Web sites that produce valuable content are going to (have to) employ people to sell advertisements and put those ads into their own content, just like the big boys of the much-scorned "old media" do (ie: Newspapers, TV, Radio).
You seem to think that these theories are meant to be taken literally. You might want to do some more reading on the subject. People much smarter than you have been thinking about this for decades.
Slashdot Mirror
I personally don't give a shit who I buy it from. If somebody has it at a price I'm willing to pay, I'll buy it. I don't see what the problem is in the first place. Scalpers aren't doing anything wrong, as far as I can tell.
Why should it be illegal? Why should I care about this? If something is too expensive because the ticket face price is too much, or the reseller's price is too high, I don't go. I don't see what the problem is.
If you're changing server OS's in the middle of an implementation, then you've got much bigger problems than what kind of database you're using.
SQL Server is free up to 10 GB. After that, I'll probably still pay for SQL Server. MySQL and MariaDB are toys, and there's nothing that PostGre offers that SQL Server doesn't.
Why are you such an Anonymous Asshole?
It's funny that you're suggesting that a government good should be profitable, but a private company doesn't have to.
The regulations are atrocious too. A sane tax rate is only part of the picture.
I hear this from Fox News drones all the time. I run a business, and I'm not familiar with any of these burdensome regulations. Care to be more specific?
I should be able to buy a full auto, short barreled rifle, at the corner store with no nanny state interference.
No, no you shouldn't.
Last I checked Disney started putting light sabers into the hands and paws of their cartoon characters,
They did it BEFORE Jar Jar? How'd they do that?
Unlike other religions,
You've never read the Christian Bible.
Because real gamers have been dealing with obnoxious behavior since they picked up their first controller
Kid, that's not a reason to tolerate it. And that has nothing to do with being a "Real" gamer. It has to do with being a loser in real life.
Exactly. It is the government's job to force people at gun point to pay for good and services that you want.
Yes, it's called "taxes", dipshit. Did you personally pay for the utility lines that delivered the electricity that allowed you to write that moronic post?
What happens when the government kills one of my relatives through penny-pinching on diagnostic tests or it decides that expensive cancer drug keeping you alive is just too expensive?
With the government, you have an appeal process. When it's private insurance, you're fucked.
What does market share have to do with whether or not one uses an OS?
Yay! Nothing says "success" like working for free. Great job!
D&D does cause violence. I want to punch people who play D&D.
The ability for our business to access "The Cloud" is determined by Time Warner Cable. So, no.
Wah.
Why should Amazon care? Nobody is going to stop shopping there. People just want their cheap shit, and don't care who they do business with. If most people could save $0.50 buying their toilet paper from known child rapists, they would.
There are practical reasons for having the federal government involved. Primarily, certain states (TX, AL), would be teaching kids about Jeebus and other Magical Sky Zombies if left to their own devices. The Constitution is nice in theory, but there are limits to its practicality.
The problem is that nobody is selling their own ads. It's that simple. It's these stupid shitty ad networks (Google, included) that are the problem. And I'm always going to block them. If web sites want to sell their OWN advertising and host it from their OWN web sites, then I'd have absolutely no problem. But, what web site wants to employ salespeople and (ad) designers when you can just copy and paste a line of code into a web site? Well, I think the ones that continue to do that into the future are the ones that aren't going to make money. Whether they stick around or not is up to them. I wouldn't mind having a pre-AOL web back, personally. But sites that rely on ad networks for revenue are going to start drying up as more and more people block these stupid fucking ad networks. Web sites that produce valuable content are going to (have to) employ people to sell advertisements and put those ads into their own content, just like the big boys of the much-scorned "old media" do (ie: Newspapers, TV, Radio).
You seem to think that these theories are meant to be taken literally. You might want to do some more reading on the subject. People much smarter than you have been thinking about this for decades.
You're right. It's also only "spooky" if time exists as we perceive it to.
like most progressives fails to recognize that two people are required to make a baby
Yeah, a guy's 30 seconds of friction and little squirt are equivalent to a woman's pregnancy and childbirth subsequent recovery. Spot on.
No, that's not true. Most wealthy people I know don't act like that. People who buy showy luxury things are usually those least able to afford them.