Well, hell, I've dated women for months before I came to the realization that I had no clue who they really were! I think what is at work is that this is a function of technology, and most technologies in the past served to drive a wedge between people, to alienate them. It is counterintuitive, then, to have in our midst a technology that actually brings people together.
I think you're overthinking this one- the problem they face is less the violent crowd than it is the non-violent crowd. This might just be the perfect weapon to nip the next Gandhi or MLK in the bud. Disperse the crowd effectively before critical mass is reached. Goodbye right to peaceably assemble.
It is interesting reading your post, it makes me wonder if perhaps the reason our system seems so bad right now isn't because the system is inherently flawed. Rather, because it is tending to attract the lowest grade, bush league (pun sort of intended), inept brand of leaders in the land. I think that is the real problem we face right now, that people who are naturally inclined to be competant, ethical leaders are the greatest threat to the incompenant, do-nothing cowards who inhabit the seats of leadership in this country, whether in public or private form. Perhaps that in itself is a problem of the system, I'm not quite sure.
I guess I'm more of the camp that either the telco market should be regulated or it shouldn't be, but this half-assed system we have is the worst of both regulation and markets. Its like having all the problems of polygamy with none of the benefits.
Reminds me of a joke I heard in a bar a while back- that the NHTSA was to require voice recorders in all trucks. In most of the country, right before a fatal wreck, the most commonly uttered phrase was "Oh shit!", but in Montana the most commonly uttered phrase was "Hold my beer, watch this!"
But what law was broken? The SEC just recently changed the rule, yet is going back and punishing all these companies ex post facto. I think this is all doing more harm than good, because it creates this layer of uncertainty about who the SEC will go after next. Everyone is a suspect, and nothing is investable. It would seem more sensible to me if the SEC just said "Look, we know you did some shady stuff in the past and we didn't have a clear rule on anything, but henceforth, you're on notice." This stuff is just destroying the market. (Whatever happened to cavaet emptor?)
What if they go through the tabs and intentionally inject errors into them? Would they not then be original works? Just to mix things up, maybe change one word in the title of each song?
Seems like a pretty good idea to me, kinda reminds me of the old strategy of the cigarette companies- hook 'em when they're young. Think of it like this, Google is an aggregator of personal information to be utilized for marketing purposes. It's not inconceivable that they're in bed with the likes of ChoicePoint and their ilk. So... if you have the kiddies' social networks mapped out, and you know what they're searching for, and perchance if you get some of them onto gmail, Google would pretty much have the keys to the kingdom of one of the only demographics with any disposable income right now.
Moreover, why should we have to trust the government to administer a system for licensing and bonding of journalists? Short of having such a system, we are left with the current working definition of "journalist", which is anyone who says they are a journalist. For that, we already have a shield law: the first amendment. It would be nice if it were enforced.
Bill O'Reilly got his Masters in Broadcast Jounalism, so by your criterion he's a journalist (a bad one at that). My criterion would be that a journalist is someone who says they are one. Whether they are good or not is a separate question.
The same problem existed with Vietnam, Congress eventually got around their abdication of responsibility by using their control of the purse strings. I think that's how things will ultimately wind down (esp. if the Dems get Congress)- we won't be seeing the $80 bln "supplemental" spending bills go through, and we may see outright cuts in military spending (a la 1969/70). Just a hunch, though.
Man (to Waitress): Morning! Waitress (In drag as a bit of a rat-bag): Morning! Man: Well, what've you got? Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and crab;
egg bacon and crab; egg bacon sausage and crab; crab bacon sausage
and crab; crab egg crab crab bacon and crab; crab sausage crab crab
bacon crab tomato and crab; Vikings (starting to chant): Crab crab crab crab... Waitress:...crab crab crab egg and crab; crab crab crab crab crab crab baked
beans crab crab crab... Vikings (singing): Crab! Lovely crab! Lovely crab! Waitress:...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a
Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with
truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and crab. Wife: Have you got anything without crab? Waitress: Well, there's crab egg sausage and crab, that's not got much crab in
it. Wife: I don't want ANY crab! Man: Why can't she have egg bacon crab and sausage? Wife: THAT'S got crab in it! Man: Hasn't got as much crab in it as crab egg sausage and crab, has it? Vikings: Crab crab crab crab (crescendo through next few lines) Wife: Could you do the egg bacon crab and sausage without the crab then? Waitress: Urgghh! Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like crab! Vikings: Lovely crab! Wonderful crab!) Waitress: Shut up! Vikings: Lovely crab! Wonderful crab! Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon
crab and sausage without the crab. Wife (shrieks): I don't like crab! Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your crab. I love it.
I'm having crab crab crab crab crab crab crab beaked beans crab crab
crab and crab! Vikings (singing): Crab crab crab crab. Lovely crab! Wonderful crab! Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off. Man: Well could I have her crab instead of the baked beans then? Waitress: You mean crab crab crab crab crab crab... (but it is too late and
the Vikings drown her words) Vikings (singing elaborately): Crab crab crab crab. Lovely crab! Wonderful
crab! Crab craa-a-a-a-a-ab crab cra-a-a-a-a-ab crab. Lovely crab!
Lovely crab! Lovely crab! Lovely crab! Lovely crab! Crab crab
crab crab!
Fair enough. BUT- if AAPL were backdating options, were they breaking any laws? Does it matter whether their shareholers appoved of it? I'm just curious. It would be a whole hell of a lot simpler if executives were compensated with cash money like the rest of us...
This may reveal my total ignorance about such matters, but to me the raft of stock options controversies reminds me a bit of the steroids scandal in baseball. While to the common observer, it may appear to be the height of impropriety, it isn't a violation of any laws on the books. Furthermore, the shareholders have this nasty tendency to keep approving such pay packages, and as long as they keep doing that, there isn't much that can be done to remedy the situation. But again, my understanding may be completely off base, and I'd greatly appreciate being corrected.
Isn't the real lesson from that whole debacle that Choicepoint has no business handling my personal information? It seems to me like if they really were to 'get it', they would find a different line of work to be in, and perhaps do some form of good for humanity. In my mind, the real transgression going on wasn't the 160,000- odd cases of Nigerians getting their hands on the personal data, its the unknown number of 'legitimate' transactions.
I think you've hit a good point, that people have no say as to what is done with their info. There really needs to be a mechanism, or a form or something where I can tell Choicepoint to delete any records having to do with me.
My dear friend, I may not have a clue what I'm talking about, but when has that ever stopped anybody from talking?
Per the first point, it may sound like hyperbole, but I think the military is one of the (if not the) most important functions of the state. As such, I think they should be paid and compensated like professionals (if not more so). Secondly, not everyone can serve in the military (I can't, they wouldn't let me in because of my ticker, go figure), but I think it is important that the sacrifice for national security be shared by all, so getting the hell taxed out of the population would make sense in that context (or just do what they do now, which is just run the currency presses all the time).
Should has nothing to do with it. Notice my use of the word "allow". If you, as an employer, did not think participating in such a system was a good idea, don't buy in. Simple.
See? We're not so far apart.
Dude, my point wasn't about the military, it was about our messed up health care system. Here's my idea of paradise:
1. Make the base pay for an E-1 $80,000/yr. Scale on up accordingly.
2. Allow any private employer to buy into the same health care system available to federal agencies/military.
3. Rejoice.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, hell, I've dated women for months before I came to the realization that I had no clue who they really were! I think what is at work is that this is a function of technology, and most technologies in the past served to drive a wedge between people, to alienate them. It is counterintuitive, then, to have in our midst a technology that actually brings people together.
Easy for you to say, if you've never dropped your keys in a pot of boiling water!
Efficacy.
I think you're overthinking this one- the problem they face is less the violent crowd than it is the non-violent crowd. This might just be the perfect weapon to nip the next Gandhi or MLK in the bud. Disperse the crowd effectively before critical mass is reached. Goodbye right to peaceably assemble.
It is interesting reading your post, it makes me wonder if perhaps the reason our system seems so bad right now isn't because the system is inherently flawed. Rather, because it is tending to attract the lowest grade, bush league (pun sort of intended), inept brand of leaders in the land. I think that is the real problem we face right now, that people who are naturally inclined to be competant, ethical leaders are the greatest threat to the incompenant, do-nothing cowards who inhabit the seats of leadership in this country, whether in public or private form. Perhaps that in itself is a problem of the system, I'm not quite sure.
I guess I'm more of the camp that either the telco market should be regulated or it shouldn't be, but this half-assed system we have is the worst of both regulation and markets. Its like having all the problems of polygamy with none of the benefits.
I'd be with you if we could throw farm subsidies and the War on Drugs on the pile.
Reminds me of a joke I heard in a bar a while back- that the NHTSA was to require voice recorders in all trucks. In most of the country, right before a fatal wreck, the most commonly uttered phrase was "Oh shit!", but in Montana the most commonly uttered phrase was "Hold my beer, watch this!"
What was the crime? Just because its wrong doesn't make it illegal.
But what law was broken? The SEC just recently changed the rule, yet is going back and punishing all these companies ex post facto. I think this is all doing more harm than good, because it creates this layer of uncertainty about who the SEC will go after next. Everyone is a suspect, and nothing is investable. It would seem more sensible to me if the SEC just said "Look, we know you did some shady stuff in the past and we didn't have a clear rule on anything, but henceforth, you're on notice." This stuff is just destroying the market. (Whatever happened to cavaet emptor?)
You forgot:
3.) Women
What if they go through the tabs and intentionally inject errors into them? Would they not then be original works? Just to mix things up, maybe change one word in the title of each song?
Seems like a pretty good idea to me, kinda reminds me of the old strategy of the cigarette companies- hook 'em when they're young. Think of it like this, Google is an aggregator of personal information to be utilized for marketing purposes. It's not inconceivable that they're in bed with the likes of ChoicePoint and their ilk. So... if you have the kiddies' social networks mapped out, and you know what they're searching for, and perchance if you get some of them onto gmail, Google would pretty much have the keys to the kingdom of one of the only demographics with any disposable income right now.
Just a thought.
Moreover, why should we have to trust the government to administer a system for licensing and bonding of journalists? Short of having such a system, we are left with the current working definition of "journalist", which is anyone who says they are a journalist. For that, we already have a shield law: the first amendment. It would be nice if it were enforced.
Headline sounded like this should be the new slashdot poll. I'll go with Cowboy Neal.
Bill O'Reilly got his Masters in Broadcast Jounalism, so by your criterion he's a journalist (a bad one at that). My criterion would be that a journalist is someone who says they are one. Whether they are good or not is a separate question.
The main problem is that most CEOs nowadays only stay with companies for a limited amount of time.
Those darned immortal CEOs are so hard to find.
The same problem existed with Vietnam, Congress eventually got around their abdication of responsibility by using their control of the purse strings. I think that's how things will ultimately wind down (esp. if the Dems get Congress)- we won't be seeing the $80 bln "supplemental" spending bills go through, and we may see outright cuts in military spending (a la 1969/70). Just a hunch, though.
Now now, we cant be throwing food away!!
...crab crab crab egg and crab; crab crab crab crab crab crab baked ...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a
Man (to Waitress): Morning!
Waitress (In drag as a bit of a rat-bag): Morning!
Man: Well, what've you got?
Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and crab;
egg bacon and crab; egg bacon sausage and crab; crab bacon sausage
and crab; crab egg crab crab bacon and crab; crab sausage crab crab
bacon crab tomato and crab;
Vikings (starting to chant): Crab crab crab crab...
Waitress:
beans crab crab crab...
Vikings (singing): Crab! Lovely crab! Lovely crab!
Waitress:
Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with
truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and crab.
Wife: Have you got anything without crab?
Waitress: Well, there's crab egg sausage and crab, that's not got much crab in
it.
Wife: I don't want ANY crab!
Man: Why can't she have egg bacon crab and sausage?
Wife: THAT'S got crab in it!
Man: Hasn't got as much crab in it as crab egg sausage and crab, has it?
Vikings: Crab crab crab crab (crescendo through next few lines)
Wife: Could you do the egg bacon crab and sausage without the crab then?
Waitress: Urgghh!
Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like crab!
Vikings: Lovely crab! Wonderful crab!)
Waitress: Shut up!
Vikings: Lovely crab! Wonderful crab!
Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon
crab and sausage without the crab.
Wife (shrieks): I don't like crab!
Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your crab. I love it.
I'm having crab crab crab crab crab crab crab beaked beans crab crab
crab and crab!
Vikings (singing): Crab crab crab crab. Lovely crab! Wonderful crab!
Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off.
Man: Well could I have her crab instead of the baked beans then?
Waitress: You mean crab crab crab crab crab crab... (but it is too late and
the Vikings drown her words)
Vikings (singing elaborately): Crab crab crab crab. Lovely crab! Wonderful
crab! Crab craa-a-a-a-a-ab crab cra-a-a-a-a-ab crab. Lovely crab!
Lovely crab! Lovely crab! Lovely crab! Lovely crab! Crab crab
crab crab!
Fair enough. BUT- if AAPL were backdating options, were they breaking any laws? Does it matter whether their shareholers appoved of it? I'm just curious. It would be a whole hell of a lot simpler if executives were compensated with cash money like the rest of us...
This may reveal my total ignorance about such matters, but to me the raft of stock options controversies reminds me a bit of the steroids scandal in baseball. While to the common observer, it may appear to be the height of impropriety, it isn't a violation of any laws on the books. Furthermore, the shareholders have this nasty tendency to keep approving such pay packages, and as long as they keep doing that, there isn't much that can be done to remedy the situation. But again, my understanding may be completely off base, and I'd greatly appreciate being corrected.
Rain God
I can never perform when someone else is watching.
Isn't the real lesson from that whole debacle that Choicepoint has no business handling my personal information? It seems to me like if they really were to 'get it', they would find a different line of work to be in, and perhaps do some form of good for humanity. In my mind, the real transgression going on wasn't the 160,000- odd cases of Nigerians getting their hands on the personal data, its the unknown number of 'legitimate' transactions.
I think you've hit a good point, that people have no say as to what is done with their info. There really needs to be a mechanism, or a form or something where I can tell Choicepoint to delete any records having to do with me.
My dear friend, I may not have a clue what I'm talking about, but when has that ever stopped anybody from talking?
Per the first point, it may sound like hyperbole, but I think the military is one of the (if not the) most important functions of the state. As such, I think they should be paid and compensated like professionals (if not more so). Secondly, not everyone can serve in the military (I can't, they wouldn't let me in because of my ticker, go figure), but I think it is important that the sacrifice for national security be shared by all, so getting the hell taxed out of the population would make sense in that context (or just do what they do now, which is just run the currency presses all the time).
Should has nothing to do with it. Notice my use of the word "allow". If you, as an employer, did not think participating in such a system was a good idea, don't buy in. Simple.
See? We're not so far apart.
Dude, my point wasn't about the military, it was about our messed up health care system. Here's my idea of paradise:
1. Make the base pay for an E-1 $80,000/yr. Scale on up accordingly.
2. Allow any private employer to buy into the same health care system available to federal agencies/military.
3. Rejoice.