In some countries, like Canada any kind of contract relationship that looks too much like an employer-employee relationship can be deemed as such, and there have been companies nailed very hard if they're determined to be an employer; particular when it comes to various payroll taxes or violating maximum weekly hours.
The problem is that the US revolution happened about 20 or 30 years too early. If it had happened in the 1790s or early 1800s, the modern Westminster systen would have been their model, instead of the "elect a king" model.
It will certainly be screwed if it keeps allowing corporate interests to arguing away the taxes they should be paying.
I'm genuinely concerned that events like Brexit and the Trump victory are the opening shots in some sort of modern day French revolution. The aristocrats of our age are as detached from reality as the French aristocrats were, and as unwilling to accept the responsibilities that come with vast accrual of wealth. They are creating a dangerously unstable situation, and when the Trumps of the world prove as incapable or unwilling to rebalance economic and social issues, then we may be facing a far less savory group of revolutionaries. And, as the French Revolution so ably demonstrated, even wealth isnt an absolute shield.
Exactly right. Far too many businesses, including big monster corporations like Walmart, essentially rely upon taxpayer-funded social safety nets to basically be their benefit and wage fallback system. They may claim they're paying what the market will bear, but what they're really doing is underwriting their own profits at the expense of taxpayers.
Even brilliant people can find themselves out of work, and become prey for pretty predatory companies happy to take advantage of them. I've worked in the employment industry for many years and see even some pretty highly skilled people stuck in shit-ass jobs because they can't afford to move.
That is why most jurisdictions have it least some basic level of worker protection, and why no one seriously contemplates turning the industrialized world into a Libertarian fantasy land.
A whole lot of disappointed people will vote for the Democrat because Trump a) didn't do much of what he said and b) turned out to be just a mouthy incompetent version of everything they thought they were voting against.
Well, if it's any comfort, there are several Republican Senators asking the same question. But really, whether you trust Obama or not, he was elected by the same rules that will put Trump in the White House. In other words, he has the legitimate constitutional authority to order such an investigation. Your trust in it is irrelevant.
And he's giving the electorate even more of it. It's fascinating to hear that it was Bob Dole behind his phone call to Taiwan, what with ol' Bob and all his "interests" in Taiwan...
For now the bulk of Trump's die hard supporters will continue cheering for him as he breaks promise after promise. The Rust Belt voters didn't vote for him for anything he said, he was indeed their version of a Brexit vote, a way of sticking to the elites real and perceived. I doubt many voters in these areas hold any illusions as to his capabilities.
What will be interesting isn't four years of Trump's "Twitter presidency", it will be how the Democrats respond, because in all likelihood, a man of Trump's age is unlikely to be seeking a second term, so it will be another non-incumbent election. Will they be able to find an answer to Trump?
Well, if you're willing to simply invent whole new definitions for words, "ousted" could mean "pickle and onion sandwich". Of course, most of us here speak English, so the word "ousted" has a fairly specific meaning that doesn't include people who are ending a term.
There's no evidence of mass voter fraud. This is once again a demonstration of how Trump supporters, even in victory, seem very uneasy. Trumpites, such delicate little snowflakes.
1. Not ousted, merely at the end of his second and final term (and one wonders if the 22nd Amendment didn't exist if the election might have been rather different). 2. He's still the lawful and constitutional POTUS until January, so he has ever right to order such a review. 3. Why are Trump supporters so nervous of investigations and recounts? It almost seems like they think there's something to hide.
I think we should look ahead to the day when anyone trying to game a stock market is taken outside, stripped naked, and their testicles are plugged into a car battery, but that's just me.
No, what he is referring to is that you get into a command shell, you can invoke an unsigned PowerShell script with PowerShell.exe -file. But that's not much different than source in bash.
But it's hard to imagine a social engineering attack that would get a user to download a file and then get them into a CLI session to override execute flags or signing to invoke the script file.
This is one of the reasons micro kernels have a much more manageable security model. The problem being microkernels have some performance penalties that, at least in previous generations of CPUs, lead most OS developers to work in monolithic or mixed models. Yes, there are user space device drivers, so there has been a lot of work done to move device drivers a lot further away from Ring 0 and Ring 1, but even this simply makes monolithic kernels even more complex, and complexity is always the enemy of security.
Slashdot Mirror
Translation: I'm an MS shill
In some countries, like Canada any kind of contract relationship that looks too much like an employer-employee relationship can be deemed as such, and there have been companies nailed very hard if they're determined to be an employer; particular when it comes to various payroll taxes or violating maximum weekly hours.
The problem is that the US revolution happened about 20 or 30 years too early. If it had happened in the 1790s or early 1800s, the modern Westminster systen would have been their model, instead of the "elect a king" model.
Ask yourself the same question, Mr. right winger.
The problem being that modern conservatism has evolved into a reality-denying screed that is purely short term reactionaryism.
A libertarianism and its "freedom to starve".
It will certainly be screwed if it keeps allowing corporate interests to arguing away the taxes they should be paying.
I'm genuinely concerned that events like Brexit and the Trump victory are the opening shots in some sort of modern day French revolution. The aristocrats of our age are as detached from reality as the French aristocrats were, and as unwilling to accept the responsibilities that come with vast accrual of wealth. They are creating a dangerously unstable situation, and when the Trumps of the world prove as incapable or unwilling to rebalance economic and social issues, then we may be facing a far less savory group of revolutionaries. And, as the French Revolution so ably demonstrated, even wealth isnt an absolute shield.
I love how blaming a Jew always enters these screeds at some point.
And if the job can't, then that business isn't viable and should be shut down.
Exactly right. Far too many businesses, including big monster corporations like Walmart, essentially rely upon taxpayer-funded social safety nets to basically be their benefit and wage fallback system. They may claim they're paying what the market will bear, but what they're really doing is underwriting their own profits at the expense of taxpayers.
If raising the minimum wage to $15 speeds up automation, all it has done has hastened the end of these jobs. They were doomed, and likely doomed soon.
Even brilliant people can find themselves out of work, and become prey for pretty predatory companies happy to take advantage of them. I've worked in the employment industry for many years and see even some pretty highly skilled people stuck in shit-ass jobs because they can't afford to move.
That is why most jurisdictions have it least some basic level of worker protection, and why no one seriously contemplates turning the industrialized world into a Libertarian fantasy land.
A whole lot of disappointed people will vote for the Democrat because Trump a) didn't do much of what he said and b) turned out to be just a mouthy incompetent version of everything they thought they were voting against.
Well, if it's any comfort, there are several Republican Senators asking the same question. But really, whether you trust Obama or not, he was elected by the same rules that will put Trump in the White House. In other words, he has the legitimate constitutional authority to order such an investigation. Your trust in it is irrelevant.
And he's giving the electorate even more of it. It's fascinating to hear that it was Bob Dole behind his phone call to Taiwan, what with ol' Bob and all his "interests" in Taiwan...
For now the bulk of Trump's die hard supporters will continue cheering for him as he breaks promise after promise. The Rust Belt voters didn't vote for him for anything he said, he was indeed their version of a Brexit vote, a way of sticking to the elites real and perceived. I doubt many voters in these areas hold any illusions as to his capabilities.
What will be interesting isn't four years of Trump's "Twitter presidency", it will be how the Democrats respond, because in all likelihood, a man of Trump's age is unlikely to be seeking a second term, so it will be another non-incumbent election. Will they be able to find an answer to Trump?
Well, if you're willing to simply invent whole new definitions for words, "ousted" could mean "pickle and onion sandwich". Of course, most of us here speak English, so the word "ousted" has a fairly specific meaning that doesn't include people who are ending a term.
A "power" then. Yes, a sitting President can order investigations on foreign powers attempting to influence domestic affairs.
There's no evidence of mass voter fraud. This is once again a demonstration of how Trump supporters, even in victory, seem very uneasy. Trumpites, such delicate little snowflakes.
1. Not ousted, merely at the end of his second and final term (and one wonders if the 22nd Amendment didn't exist if the election might have been rather different).
2. He's still the lawful and constitutional POTUS until January, so he has ever right to order such a review.
3. Why are Trump supporters so nervous of investigations and recounts? It almost seems like they think there's something to hide.
I have to say that of all the sounds that have irritated me in a theater, I've never had someone eating popcorn being one of them.
I think we should look ahead to the day when anyone trying to game a stock market is taken outside, stripped naked, and their testicles are plugged into a car battery, but that's just me.
No, what he is referring to is that you get into a command shell, you can invoke an unsigned PowerShell script with PowerShell.exe -file. But that's not much different than source in bash.
But it's hard to imagine a social engineering attack that would get a user to download a file and then get them into a CLI session to override execute flags or signing to invoke the script file.
My chief issue with Powershell is the naming conventions. I prefer the mnemonic approach of the *nix world.
This is one of the reasons micro kernels have a much more manageable security model. The problem being microkernels have some performance penalties that, at least in previous generations of CPUs, lead most OS developers to work in monolithic or mixed models. Yes, there are user space device drivers, so there has been a lot of work done to move device drivers a lot further away from Ring 0 and Ring 1, but even this simply makes monolithic kernels even more complex, and complexity is always the enemy of security.