Yeah, much better for us to fabricate evidence to go to war, expose our own CIA agents because they're political opponents and violate human rights conventions because they're inconvenient. Oh, and lets not forget to spend ourselves into unimaginable debt in the process.
With any "service" there comes a point where it no longer makes economic sense to produce it yourself. Would you suggest we should all make our own electricity too so that we can feel "significant"?
We can piss-off these anti-violence people all we want, and what are they going to do about it?
So if I understand this...you're challenging anti-violence people to a fight? Maybe there is a lesson here....
Because political news/brawling brings tons of page views. Tons of page views = more/. ad revenue. And see, since I said "page view" it implies I know a little something about webservers. And since I know a little about webservers, well, I must be a nerd!
And the victim's coping strategy would be what? Oh right, lie in a hospital bed for a few weeks or months, out of work and perhaps physically or mentally damaged for life.
Using a party as a "coping strategy" is simply denying introspection or responsibility - thus, the non-reduced sentence is entirely appropriate.
You could make that argument for anyone that breaks the law. People should know they will be held accountable for their actions.
Laws are meant to protect society. If this guy, with his cavalier attitude toward hurting people, goes out and does it again...then what? Will you be ready to "fudge up his life" then?
What is that? Boy that sounds like a Cliff Claven quote if I've ever heard one. "Y'see Noam - it was back in the Noahchian period of Mahs when the mahtians would take baths in the wahtah and lakes. This has been proved with the phyllosilicahtes found up thah.
Of course. It's all the media's fault. Peer reviewed journals are never wrong blah blah blah.
My moral of the story is that you don't just swallow what anybody feeds you without weighing it against the context of prior events. History books are readily available too.
Yeah, I was there too. I remember reading in the papers that at the rate we were burning gasoline that the planet's resources would be exhausted in 10 years.
You can bitch and moan about trolls, but there's been enough examples of science/scientists being wrong that questioning scientific authority is not unjustified.
Is that where you stuff toilet paper in every available gap so that no one can see thru the cracks to see what you are doing? If so, I hate to inform you there's a guy that works at Fannie Mae that has prior art on that one.
IMO It comes down to this. Company management is supposed to take actions that are in the best interest of *all* shareholders. If by providing incentives to bring on/keep great employees eventually increases shareholder value, then that's what they should do. The percentage of shares is not as relevant here as the value of the shares since everyone is diluted equally.
Well, what if craigslist wanted to bring on new employees (or incent existing people)? In that case they'd have to issue more shares and *all* shareholders already in the company would get diluted - nothing illegal or immoral about that. Existing minority shareholders might not be happy about it or agree with the board's decision, but it's not their call to make.
Right on! I used my nigerian money to buy boobs and a new, larger, p3n1s. Of course, then I need healthy doses of V1agr@ and other M3ds! to make it all work.
If you provide us with your email address, I can send you and 5,000,000 of your closest friends an offer for an AMAZING new drug that will cure "ass-pee".
Well Nahm, few people know that "tuhmoil" is an rare tuhm used by the ancient Greeks to descrahbe the combination of both "tahm" and a sprangloaded coyul; in other wahds, the fahst wahtch. What tahm is it? Let me check my Tuhmoil.
So then let's assume that Zapmedia are the "good guys" in this dispute. That brings to me this question:
What good is an idea if you can't execute on it? I'm pretty sure that Apple didn't steal the idea from Zapmedia, so really....what is the consideration that Apple is supposed to pay Zapmedia for?
They (Zapmedia) had a headstart but didn't have the business/marketing wherewithal to do anything with it and now they want the US govt to do what their ineffective business could not - make big money.
I suspect the thinking is because excessive discounting could be used to drive out competitors that couldn't go that low without going out of business. Once small helpless competitors are driven out, then the anti-competitive big bad business can set their prices to whatever they want. I wonder if there is also a law saying that they can't sell it for more than 5% of the publishers marked price? And then you'd need a law for the publisher... and then you'd need a law for the paper producers... and another law for the ink producers...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, much better for us to fabricate evidence to go to war, expose our own CIA agents because they're political opponents and violate human rights conventions because they're inconvenient. Oh, and lets not forget to spend ourselves into unimaginable debt in the process.
This story is a troll.
With any "service" there comes a point where it no longer makes economic sense to produce it yourself. Would you suggest we should all make our own electricity too so that we can feel "significant"?
We can piss-off these anti-violence people all we want, and what are they going to do about it?
So if I understand this...you're challenging anti-violence people to a fight? Maybe there is a lesson here....
According to your article, it's 69% in favor in July. It *was* 73% in June.
Because political news/brawling brings tons of page views. Tons of page views = more /. ad revenue. And see, since I said "page view" it implies I know a little something about webservers. And since I know a little about webservers, well, I must be a nerd!
...he'd have put a few ads on his blog page. Getting slashdotted would have earned him, uh, maybe as much as $5.00!
And the victim's coping strategy would be what? Oh right, lie in a hospital bed for a few weeks or months, out of work and perhaps physically or mentally damaged for life.
Using a party as a "coping strategy" is simply denying introspection or responsibility - thus, the non-reduced sentence is entirely appropriate.
You could make that argument for anyone that breaks the law. People should know they will be held accountable for their actions.
Laws are meant to protect society. If this guy, with his cavalier attitude toward hurting people, goes out and does it again...then what? Will you be ready to "fudge up his life" then?
What is that? Boy that sounds like a Cliff Claven quote if I've ever heard one. "Y'see Noam - it was back in the Noahchian period of Mahs when the mahtians would take baths in the wahtah and lakes. This has been proved with the phyllosilicahtes found up thah.
Of course. It's all the media's fault. Peer reviewed journals are never wrong blah blah blah.
My moral of the story is that you don't just swallow what anybody feeds you without weighing it against the context of prior events. History books are readily available too.
Yeah, I was there too. I remember reading in the papers that at the rate we were burning gasoline that the planet's resources would be exhausted in 10 years.
You can bitch and moan about trolls, but there's been enough examples of science/scientists being wrong that questioning scientific authority is not unjustified.
Is that where you stuff toilet paper in every available gap so that no one can see thru the cracks to see what you are doing? If so, I hate to inform you there's a guy that works at Fannie Mae that has prior art on that one.
I would agree with you were it not for my Scottish stubbornness.
IMO It comes down to this. Company management is supposed to take actions that are in the best interest of *all* shareholders. If by providing incentives to bring on/keep great employees eventually increases shareholder value, then that's what they should do. The percentage of shares is not as relevant here as the value of the shares since everyone is diluted equally.
Well, what if craigslist wanted to bring on new employees (or incent existing people)? In that case they'd have to issue more shares and *all* shareholders already in the company would get diluted - nothing illegal or immoral about that. Existing minority shareholders might not be happy about it or agree with the board's decision, but it's not their call to make.
Right on! I used my nigerian money to buy boobs and a new, larger, p3n1s. Of course, then I need healthy doses of V1agr@ and other M3ds! to make it all work.
If you provide us with your email address, I can send you and 5,000,000 of your closest friends an offer for an AMAZING new drug that will cure "ass-pee".
You may refer to it as "the hole who so recently was known as black".
Ni.
ha, you were modded redundant. +1 funny mods.
Of course, those that buy their iLifeBitz at the iLifeStore pay twice as much but will feel better about the look and feel.
was about the most boring thing I've ever read. I couldn't bring myself to read the second half; perhaps it was more interesting.
NEWSFLASH! Some people don't like IM! Film at 11. *yawn*. Bring on the pink ponies.
Well Nahm, few people know that "tuhmoil" is an rare tuhm used by the ancient Greeks to descrahbe the combination of both "tahm" and a sprangloaded coyul; in other wahds, the fahst wahtch. What tahm is it? Let me check my Tuhmoil.
/.
Note to self: Don't drink when reading
So then let's assume that Zapmedia are the "good guys" in this dispute. That brings to me this question:
What good is an idea if you can't execute on it? I'm pretty sure that Apple didn't steal the idea from Zapmedia, so really....what is the consideration that Apple is supposed to pay Zapmedia for?
They (Zapmedia) had a headstart but didn't have the business/marketing wherewithal to do anything with it and now they want the US govt to do what their ineffective business could not - make big money.
I hate patents.
I suspect the thinking is because excessive discounting could be used to drive out competitors that couldn't go that low without going out of business. Once small helpless competitors are driven out, then the anti-competitive big bad business can set their prices to whatever they want. I wonder if there is also a law saying that they can't sell it for more than 5% of the publishers marked price? And then you'd need a law for the publisher... and then you'd need a law for the paper producers... and another law for the ink producers...
um..."mispelled"?