There are many different kinds of groups, and most of them help with their particular agendas.
Fair enough, as long as they have an agenda that doesn't abuse the people they say they help and those that are coming forward to help. The Hunger Project seems to have the most comprehensive approach. I've met too many posers, that's why I feel strongly about this.
which means they can affect electoral
I wonder whose bright idea was it to let them take the whole state if they get 51%? As for info distribution, they don't have as much control as they think they do. Internetless networks are cropping up. Information is breaking away from general distribution channels. For example, few people know that Disney didn't make a dime on The Lion King. They ripped of a japanese animation called Kimba and lost the lawsuit against them to the tune of 100% profit transfer to some small group of artists except for the Circle of Life soundtrack. However, most in the animation business do know this. Disney kept it quiet from the general public, but they couldn't control the information flow within the same industry they operate.
Trading
I'll check the book out. Thanks.
private capital can accumulate
Individuals are already reacting to this. They're actually even beginning to compete with the big shots. If we can't have the net we will replace it. If the general public doesn't want our services that's fine.
Did you know that studies have been done which demonstrate fairly conclusively that the relative performance of CEOs can be explained by chance alone ?
That's debatable. If you had a family and you saw businesses willing to pay $400,000 for a logo your kid could create and a webpage that took you 5 minutes to make, wouldn't you go for it? I would.
I think playing the market is acceptable from that perspective. Even futures traders have to make an informed decision. Like why milk might go up at a certain time or certain fruits that don't grow during a particular season. Done right, futures trading could be a good teaching device.
Daytrading is the big one for me. On the one hand it could be a way to get significant investnent (just pick a really cheesy name for your company, people will fall for it). On the other hand, once your compasny begins growing you've got to pull some of those stocks back otherwise complete idiots high on high school economics will sue you (they own your stock) for not patenting bread and cheese.
This is why I think public ownership of stocks is similar to public property collectivists like to preach about. Bose, known for its high quality audio products is a private company. I truly envy Dr. Amman Bose because he can lead his life as he pleases.
Well get some better representation, support your high schoolers in setting up local businesses for their families (don't even have to rent a loit, do it from home.), support their curiousity, take advantage of their skills, and you just might have hope.
The analogy fits perfectly. You're the one who suggested social equality. Social equality meaning everyone has an equal amount of wealth. The problem with that is that you assume that everything is continuous. That you can adjust everything one little bit at a time without consequences. You can't. If your policies have no purpose behind and no beginning middle and end, it beco,mes nothing more than posturing, buraucracy, and social service masturbation.
By fighting for equality you ignore the most important thing in the world: Is the "equal" amount everyone has enough for that person to live his/her existence. In this world you can't be 80% cured of disease, or 78% fed, or 60% recovered from a car accident. It's all or nothing. If the treatment or help or aid is equalized it never accomplishes its intent, which makes it worthless. That is disrespectful of people who intend to help. We're only human. The last thing in the world you should think of is destroying hope.
I never argued that income is a matter of hard work. You'll note I said the opposite:
Equality should depend on effort. Not just how much eveyone else has, not just how hard people work.
The average CEO works 500 times as hard as entry-level 9-hour a day workers?
Honestly, this is what scares me. WHY do you care how much the CEO makes or how much the CEO works? It's not your fucking business. CEOs become CEOS because that's the market they chose to work in. If they don't measure up to the market their company suffers. And to be honest they do work 500 times as hard as someone who has a set schedule a set job and YES DAMN IT their job is much harder than an entry level job. They have to use their heads, they have to manage a large number of people where the entry level worker can forget about the company at the end of the day.
are you saying poor people are poor because they're lazy?
You know full well I didn't. What I said is that you have no right to take a bunch of people living in the same area, make them into a group, and then hold them responsible for other people's misery. If you want to do that you must offer people a reasonable hope that that effort will be fruitful.
If people want to move on from the hell they're in, then two things must happen, they must make a commitment to follow through. The second thing that must happen is the local social service organizations must make a commitment to get them from point A to point B. The latter almost never happens.
A perfect example is the Hunger project. www.thp.org. Read their principles page. They don't give you food, clothing, or a 12 step plan to complete dependence on the local parish. They give people a fucking way out of hell.
Social equality? God no! Who's right is it to decide that because last week some schmuck lost his house everyone should donate him a brick?
Equality should depend on effort. Not just how much eveyone else has, not just how hard people work.
It should be about people willing to get out and do something. Pertaining to patent law, it should be about people being able to legally work in a high profile market in the first place. Copyright abuse just like our patent mess is partly what caused the French to revolt.
How many Britney Spears fans are there versus real musicians? Many more.
How many Britney Spears fans like the McDonalds Britney Spears flash card player or something like that? Many.
How many Britney Spears fans have your analog equipment? None.
How many companies are going to continue to make stuff nobody is buying because nothing will play on it? None.
You'll be the last one on the block w/ usable equipment. Wait that's a good thing!
How does a company that prevents its employees from inventing make money?
Who in their right mind would even bother to innovate anymore for a company that doesn't pay them any more than hourly wages, when they could be paid those hourly wages just for doing the grunt work?
I sure wouldn't pass on my inventions to a company that didn't respect my rights to them. Even if I were employed by said company.
What taxes?
What do they supply other companies if nothing other than a boatload of NDAs?
My point is the vested interests are going to screw their opportunities.
Artists who find out they can do well in their neighborhood will stay in their neighborhood and play there, no tours, no gimmicks, no awards shows, just pure freedom to do whatever the fuck you like with no one owning you.
That's coming soon.
And there is nothing the vested interests can do to stop it.
How are companies that prevent you from creating (they own everything you think while employed in cluding at home) and then wait to implement what you thought in a dream until everyone is screaming, how are they important in the US economy?
All they do is gum it up and drive it to the ground.
They're only important to the economy that is themselves.
I'm quite convinced people have seen and have been amazed by Saving Private Ryan, as well as The Shawshank Redemption, and other movies of that caliiber. They keep comparing movies such as this one to them.
Stupid analogy, no. Slighltly off the mark perhaps.
But think for a minute. Are you suggesting technicians who don't have Firestone's Trade Secrets or the right to discover those secrets would be able to find what caused those tires to explode.
It isn't at all scary. Considering the frustration I've with Amiga Inc's closed source SDK missing minute BUT FUCKING important features WHICH I CAN'T ADD because Tao owns 15% of Amiga and they're closed morons.
I could save Amiga's ass with very little work but I CAN'T. I am not allowed to.
You expect me to deal with that kind of frustration in BIND?
ARE YOU MAD?
I have a question for you.
What's with this need to speculate and guess and pontificate whenever something happens? Whatever happened to principles like only criminals will have the tools to defend themselves?
Admit it. You don't know. And you're making it even worse by guessing at their intentions.
Slashdot Mirror
Arrange content as a bitmap of sorts. Let it be written backwards, forwards, up/down, diagonally.
I don't envy users of other languages though. Must be insane to do innovative advertising and layout.
There are many different kinds of groups, and most of them help with their particular agendas.
Fair enough, as long as they have an agenda that doesn't abuse the people they say they help and those that are coming forward to help. The Hunger Project seems to have the most comprehensive approach. I've met too many posers, that's why I feel strongly about this.
which means they can affect electoral
I wonder whose bright idea was it to let them take the whole state if they get 51%? As for info distribution, they don't have as much control as they think they do. Internetless networks are cropping up. Information is breaking away from general distribution channels. For example, few people know that Disney didn't make a dime on The Lion King. They ripped of a japanese animation called Kimba and lost the lawsuit against them to the tune of 100% profit transfer to some small group of artists except for the Circle of Life soundtrack. However, most in the animation business do know this. Disney kept it quiet from the general public, but they couldn't control the information flow within the same industry they operate.
Trading
I'll check the book out. Thanks.
private capital can accumulate
Individuals are already reacting to this. They're actually even beginning to compete with the big shots. If we can't have the net we will replace it. If the general public doesn't want our services that's fine.
Did you know that studies have been done which demonstrate fairly conclusively that the relative performance of CEOs can be explained by chance alone ?
That's debatable. If you had a family and you saw businesses willing to pay $400,000 for a logo your kid could create and a webpage that took you 5 minutes to make, wouldn't you go for it? I would.
I think playing the market is acceptable from that perspective. Even futures traders have to make an informed decision. Like why milk might go up at a certain time or certain fruits that don't grow during a particular season. Done right, futures trading could be a good teaching device.
Daytrading is the big one for me. On the one hand it could be a way to get significant investnent (just pick a really cheesy name for your company, people will fall for it). On the other hand, once your compasny begins growing you've got to pull some of those stocks back otherwise complete idiots high on high school economics will sue you (they own your stock) for not patenting bread and cheese.
This is why I think public ownership of stocks is similar to public property collectivists like to preach about. Bose, known for its high quality audio products is a private company. I truly envy Dr. Amman Bose because he can lead his life as he pleases.
Well get some better representation, support your high schoolers in setting up local businesses for their families (don't even have to rent a loit, do it from home.), support their curiousity, take advantage of their skills, and you just might have hope.
The analogy fits perfectly. You're the one who suggested social equality. Social equality meaning everyone has an equal amount of wealth. The problem with that is that you assume that everything is continuous. That you can adjust everything one little bit at a time without consequences. You can't. If your policies have no purpose behind and no beginning middle and end, it beco,mes nothing more than posturing, buraucracy, and social service masturbation.
By fighting for equality you ignore the most important thing in the world: Is the "equal" amount everyone has enough for that person to live his/her existence. In this world you can't be 80% cured of disease, or 78% fed, or 60% recovered from a car accident. It's all or nothing. If the treatment or help or aid is equalized it never accomplishes its intent, which makes it worthless. That is disrespectful of people who intend to help. We're only human. The last thing in the world you should think of is destroying hope.
I never argued that income is a matter of hard work. You'll note I said the opposite:
Equality should depend on effort. Not just how much eveyone else has, not just how hard people work.
The average CEO works 500 times as hard as entry-level 9-hour a day workers?
Honestly, this is what scares me. WHY do you care how much the CEO makes or how much the CEO works? It's not your fucking business. CEOs become CEOS because that's the market they chose to work in. If they don't measure up to the market their company suffers. And to be honest they do work 500 times as hard as someone who has a set schedule a set job and YES DAMN IT their job is much harder than an entry level job. They have to use their heads, they have to manage a large number of people where the entry level worker can forget about the company at the end of the day.
are you saying poor people are poor because they're lazy?
You know full well I didn't. What I said is that you have no right to take a bunch of people living in the same area, make them into a group, and then hold them responsible for other people's misery. If you want to do that you must offer people a reasonable hope that that effort will be fruitful.
If people want to move on from the hell they're in, then two things must happen, they must make a commitment to follow through. The second thing that must happen is the local social service organizations must make a commitment to get them from point A to point B. The latter almost never happens.
A perfect example is the Hunger project. www.thp.org. Read their principles page. They don't give you food, clothing, or a 12 step plan to complete dependence on the local parish. They give people a fucking way out of hell.
Social equality? God no! Who's right is it to decide that because last week some schmuck lost his house everyone should donate him a brick?
Equality should depend on effort. Not just how much eveyone else has, not just how hard people work.
It should be about people willing to get out and do something. Pertaining to patent law, it should be about people being able to legally work in a high profile market in the first place. Copyright abuse just like our patent mess is partly what caused the French to revolt.
Now if we get all the naked... erm... careless people off the net we might have a chance.
How many Britney Spears fans are there versus real musicians? Many more. How many Britney Spears fans like the McDonalds Britney Spears flash card player or something like that? Many. How many Britney Spears fans have your analog equipment? None. How many companies are going to continue to make stuff nobody is buying because nothing will play on it? None. You'll be the last one on the block w/ usable equipment. Wait that's a good thing!
How does a company that prevents its employees from inventing make money?
Who in their right mind would even bother to innovate anymore for a company that doesn't pay them any more than hourly wages, when they could be paid those hourly wages just for doing the grunt work?
I sure wouldn't pass on my inventions to a company that didn't respect my rights to them. Even if I were employed by said company.
What taxes?
What do they supply other companies if nothing other than a boatload of NDAs?
My point is the vested interests are going to screw their opportunities.
Artists who find out they can do well in their neighborhood will stay in their neighborhood and play there, no tours, no gimmicks, no awards shows, just pure freedom to do whatever the fuck you like with no one owning you.
That's coming soon.
And there is nothing the vested interests can do to stop it.
Warning troll
How are companies that prevent you from creating (they own everything you think while employed in cluding at home) and then wait to implement what you thought in a dream until everyone is screaming, how are they important in the US economy?
All they do is gum it up and drive it to the ground.
They're only important to the economy that is themselves.
Oh I'm sorry. I said they don't have the balls. I get it...
This was so pointless.
I want functionality you eye candy crack addict.
Eventually.
Geeks are extremely afraid of divide and conquer. They see shit on other platforms they start to be suspicious.
Business is business and it'll bite whoever it sees fit.
I knew someone would latch onto and chew up the notion expressed here that Microsoft could actually do something negative in the legal sphere.
You guys are maroons, ya know that?
I'm quite convinced people have seen and have been amazed by Saving Private Ryan, as well as The Shawshank Redemption, and other movies of that caliiber. They keep comparing movies such as this one to them.
Let's see we're market conscious just like Microsoft?
How about nursing?
Microsoft is like that sometimes.
Microsoft gets ugly when they realize what they've been smoking. They're friendly to those who won't get in against them.
The same legal backing they would have if someone made an F150 and claimed Ford made it.
Stupid analogy, no. Slighltly off the mark perhaps.
But think for a minute. Are you suggesting technicians who don't have Firestone's Trade Secrets or the right to discover those secrets would be able to find what caused those tires to explode.
Curb some of your projection of context.
I need source to fix it.
It isn't all like a safe. It's like a tire.
I need a knife to cut a tire. I need Firestone's trade secrets to fix it.
It isn't at all scary. Considering the frustration I've with Amiga Inc's closed source SDK missing minute BUT FUCKING important features WHICH I CAN'T ADD because Tao owns 15% of Amiga and they're closed morons.
I could save Amiga's ass with very little work but I CAN'T. I am not allowed to.
You expect me to deal with that kind of frustration in BIND?
ARE YOU MAD?
I have a question for you.
What's with this need to speculate and guess and pontificate whenever something happens? Whatever happened to principles like only criminals will have the tools to defend themselves?
Admit it. You don't know. And you're making it even worse by guessing at their intentions.
How about asking both sides what they think?
They will wnvision this... what are you a fortune teller?