You know, at first I thought, "what, all they can do is play Pong?" But then I thought, "Hey, holy crap, they're playing Pong with their Minds!" and realized that that is pretty freaking cool if you can do that with a consumer device today.
<i>At the very least..."I" know who is storing and reading my mail. Me, not some corporation that holds it, reads it to display ads....and turns it over to the govt. at the govt's whim.</i><p><br> Except for all the service providers who's links your emails pass over in transit.
Nah, this just puts the insrance companies on even ground with each other. They don't really care about the added liability--they just raise premiums to match.
No, they just want to be sure all the other insurance companies have to play by the same rules, so they won't be undercut.
Whenever you see politicians vote for things this overwhelmingly, you can be absolutely certain that there is an unusual level of bullshit involved.
Oh, well that makes all the difference in the world, and I no longer mind having to activate my legitimate copy of Windows at intervals simply described in different "Scenarios" which I'm only kind allowed to even know about.
I wouldn't make it mandatory. It is enough to simply introduce the concept to a lot of people that it is actually possible to not ignore your family all the time with your f*cking face stuffed in your f*cking phone.
You are incredibly naive and lack perspective. You are arguing that no FURTHER intrusion on citizen's privacy is being suggested, and furthermore that the IRS can be trusted neither to lose the information, nor abuse it.
As a slashdotter, you should know better than that, at least.
Meanwhile, back in reality, ALL credit reports should have FA's by DEFAULT, and it is a travesty that this is not true, and is one of the #1 reasons identity thieves can succeed at all.
All it does (I have had one for many years now) is add the simple requirement that you be contacted at the phone number of your choice before someone can extend credit to you. It's simple, it's effective.
But instead banks would rather pay the cost of fraud in return for making it easier to extend credit.
It annoys me, too, but is it up to their to judge whether or not claims are bogus? Would you want them to? That makes them the judge and jury, as opposed to a bystander. I'm not sure they COULD be made responsible for deciding.
I've seen you or someone else advocate this in the past and it's a great idea. And somehow it works best at the end of a line. Nice job. Keep on saying it, and people may just start actually doing it~
If you really love it, you are probably also very good at it, and will not likely ever be at a loss for work (barring a major depression or some other catastrophe).
But that is a good reason to save your pennies.
But I think there have been some studies that have shown that the cream of the crop in an industry doesn't suffer during hard times, it's the average to poor performers who struggle to find work.
Which is why I find your thoughts intriguing. If I'm right and you're right, a good strong recession in IT might be just what we seriously committed types need to actually help gaurantee our long term employability.
Although I agree with everything you say, I have to state that the problem that your statements beg is how do you curb those excesses of capitalism? And ultimately that means "who gets to decide". We do have a political system which can do this, in theory, and in fact does do this, but very very slowly.
I think your idea of developing a social stigma toward excessively mercenary behavoir is an interesting one, but I'm not sure it's a good idea, because the inevitable result would probably be more government intervention. That is, if there was enough social pressure to cause this effect, there would be equal social pressure to change the laws. And I think most sane people agree that excessive regulation is an even worse cure than the disease.
So while I am not even close to satisfied with the current way of doing things, I have to admit I don't have a better idea, and thus I think "free" everything--market, "-dom", liberty, etc. is the most just way to go, and just allow the slow gears of moral justice do their thing, since I'm not willing for you (or anyone else) to be the arbiter, and I wouldn't ask you to accept me as such, either.
Please see a shrink. People are not quite as bad as you think. People are for more often foolish than malicious. The person who abused you was malicious--his supporters merely foolish, even if unforgiveably so.
After all, there would be no civilization if people weren't just _slightly_ nicer than they are mean:-)
For what it's worth, I think the fact both in your case and in TFA's case that the abuser was adult while the recipient was a minor is enough to justify serious punishment.
I've gotten lots of requests for difficult things from customers that turned out to be mere whims of some random person over there. So what I do is suggest we have a meeting with myself, the customer, and our managers to discuss the options.
Half the time, I get a "forget it, it's not important" and go back to surfing Slashdot.
If it only rotates 465 times per second, wouldn't that just make it a "centisecond" pulsar? Wouldn't it have to rotate at least a thousand times per second to be a millisecond?
Slashdot Mirror
You know, at first I thought, "what, all they can do is play Pong?" But then I thought, "Hey, holy crap, they're playing Pong with their Minds!" and realized that that is pretty freaking cool if you can do that with a consumer device today.
mod parent up
You...don't seem to be aware of what our government has been doing the last 15-20 years?
And in any case...business has the option of "taking stuff down" because of...government, which it has bought.
...would suck.
Oh I dunno. Does putting a cd-rom in the drive still bring the system to a grinding halt while it spins up?
<i>At the very least..."I" know who is storing and reading my mail. Me, not some corporation that holds it, reads it to display ads....and turns it over to the govt. at the govt's whim.</i><p><br>
Except for all the service providers who's links your emails pass over in transit.
Nah, this just puts the insrance companies on even ground with each other. They don't really care about the added liability--they just raise premiums to match.
No, they just want to be sure all the other insurance companies have to play by the same rules, so they won't be undercut.
Whenever you see politicians vote for things this overwhelmingly, you can be absolutely certain that there is an unusual level of bullshit involved.
Real dirt is an organic byproduct of life--shit and rot, to be precise, of living things.
But I agree that it's semantics~
Oh, well that makes all the difference in the world, and I no longer mind having to activate my legitimate copy of Windows at intervals simply described in different "Scenarios" which I'm only kind allowed to even know about.
I wouldn't make it mandatory. It is enough to simply introduce the concept to a lot of people that it is actually possible to not ignore your family all the time with your f*cking face stuffed in your f*cking phone.
You are incredibly naive and lack perspective. You are arguing that no FURTHER intrusion on citizen's privacy is being suggested, and furthermore that the IRS can be trusted neither to lose the information, nor abuse it.
As a slashdotter, you should know better than that, at least.
Meanwhile, back in reality, ALL credit reports should have FA's by DEFAULT, and it is a travesty that this is not true, and is one of the #1 reasons identity thieves can succeed at all.
All it does (I have had one for many years now) is add the simple requirement that you be contacted at the phone number of your choice before someone can extend credit to you. It's simple, it's effective.
But instead banks would rather pay the cost of fraud in return for making it easier to extend credit.
Madness.
It annoys me, too, but is it up to their to judge whether or not claims are bogus? Would you want them to? That makes them the judge and jury, as opposed to a bystander. I'm not sure they COULD be made responsible for deciding.
I've seen you or someone else advocate this in the past and it's a great idea. And somehow it works best at the end of a line. Nice job. Keep on saying it, and people may just start actually doing it~
The boy will surely be let off, but not before the whole world hears--and SEES--the story. All that will do is draw attention to the protest.
I predict: Score 1 for the good guys.
The only way this could be worse for Scientology is if the boy turns up dead anytime soon.
Actually, I would find it nice when I want to use one of the many free applications on Linux that are not available on winblows. k3b comes to mind...
If you really love it, you are probably also very good at it, and will not likely ever be at a loss for work (barring a major depression or some other catastrophe).
But that is a good reason to save your pennies.
But I think there have been some studies that have shown that the cream of the crop in an industry doesn't suffer during hard times, it's the average to poor performers who struggle to find work.
Which is why I find your thoughts intriguing. If I'm right and you're right, a good strong recession in IT might be just what we seriously committed types need to actually help gaurantee our long term employability.
You're wearing a radio beacon on your belt, and now your upset that someone's paying attention to it?
You're wearing a radio beacon on your belt, and now you're offended somebody's paying attention to it?
That's really cool. Can I ask you a question? Not knowing anything about that industry--what was it your machine took pictures _of_?
Bill or Steve...We all know that's you. You're just jealous you didn't get to them first.
Although I agree with everything you say, I have to state that the problem that your statements beg is how do you curb those excesses of capitalism? And ultimately that means "who gets to decide". We do have a political system which can do this, in theory, and in fact does do this, but very very slowly.
I think your idea of developing a social stigma toward excessively mercenary behavoir is an interesting one, but I'm not sure it's a good idea, because the inevitable result would probably be more government intervention. That is, if there was enough social pressure to cause this effect, there would be equal social pressure to change the laws. And I think most sane people agree that excessive regulation is an even worse cure than the disease.
So while I am not even close to satisfied with the current way of doing things, I have to admit I don't have a better idea, and thus I think "free" everything--market, "-dom", liberty, etc. is the most just way to go, and just allow the slow gears of moral justice do their thing, since I'm not willing for you (or anyone else) to be the arbiter, and I wouldn't ask you to accept me as such, either.
Please see a shrink. People are not quite as bad as you think. People are for more often foolish than malicious. The person who abused you was malicious--his supporters merely foolish, even if unforgiveably so.
:-)
After all, there would be no civilization if people weren't just _slightly_ nicer than they are mean
For what it's worth, I think the fact both in your case and in TFA's case that the abuser was adult while the recipient was a minor is enough to justify serious punishment.
I've gotten lots of requests for difficult things from customers that turned out to be mere whims of some random person over there. So what I do is suggest we have a meeting with myself, the customer, and our managers to discuss the options.
Half the time, I get a "forget it, it's not important" and go back to surfing Slashdot.
If it only rotates 465 times per second, wouldn't that just make it a "centisecond" pulsar? Wouldn't it have to rotate at least a thousand times per second to be a millisecond?
:-D