I have to disagree. Throughout human history major advances in the awareness of our shared humanity have come from the dreamers at the edges of our cultures. Any idea starts with a few people. If the idea is strong enough and true enough, other people with ability will take up its cause. There was a first time that 2 or 3 men acted together in defiance of the dominant temporal power to assert their rights. As time went by, humanity began to develop the concepts of equality, fairness, and the rights of individuals. Always there were men who had a vision of a better way and such was the power of their vision that other men agreed. These men, often at peril of their lives, challenged us to make a better world. Enough men have taken the challenge through the ages for our civilization to flourish. Just about two hundred and thirty years ago a group of these men with visions found themselves together and they changed the fabric of human interaction forever. They had the idea that each individual man had a right to his own life - and that if enough men of like mind would stand beside them they could make a place without kings or lords - where each man was master of his own destiny. Of course, they wrote the Constitution, rebelled against the lawful government, and took up arms. At that moment those few men defined the moral and ethical beliefs that have shaped our country's journey towards real equality and civil liberty.
Sometimes the journey isn't easy and we've paid the price as individuals and as a nation. We are still embarked on the journey. We are a contentious species and there will always be those who resist change out of fear, or hate, or greed. With a struggle we abolished slavery. As a country we recognized the absolute rationality of tolerance and freedom of expression. We uphold each person's inalienable right to believe and act how they will - restricted only by the compact of laws he accepts as a citizen. Now women and men of all races are equal voting partners in our society. We are judged on our words and our deeds without regard to the family or country of our birth. Together we have decided that discrimination is wrong. You can not be denied the privileges of your citizenship due to race, age, sex, religion, or beliefs. Everyone has the same right to be heard, worship as they will, and choose their lifestyle. We have all agreed with those men with the visions - we have nurtured and enhanced that vision towards its natural realization, even through the inevitable upheaval of change. And we have paid the price with our hearts and our blood.
There are times in the life of ourselves or our country which demand the absolute best we can do. A time of change when we can each aspire to that vision that we take for granted so much of the time. A time when we can be better than the ordinary and the average and look to the dreamers for our inspiration. A time to put aside the fear and ignorance - to reject the transparent attempts at misdirection, manipulation, and control. It's time for us to remember how this country got started and prove that all the sacrifices of Americans to keep it strong have not been wasted. It's time to stand up for the freedom and equality of ALL Americans.
billy - would you go to the users to decide your security policy?
"What we need is more team effort. More sports. The sex, the booze, this is stuff that currupts people, it is worse than money."
But why in the world would anyone believe that when you also say...
"It is not violent. It is a team sport. If bringing someone down is violent, then society has become filled with pussies. Sorry, but if you cry after being tackeled, that is whack. It is no more violent than in baseball when a pitcher hits a batter."
Talk about 'whack'! That is the kind of attitude that could be harmful to kids. Someone who cries is a "pussy"? Football is a team sport. Football is a violent sport. Tackling is a violent activity. You are a moron. Tell you what - I'll stand 90 feet away from you and you can throw a baseball at me. Then you stand 90 feet away from me and I'll run up and tackle you. Then, after you wake up, we'll compare violence. Then, unlike the 2 or 3 times in a season you might get beaned in baseball, I'll knock you on your ass again, and again, and again. Then it's halftime. And by the way - the reason you see so much sex and booze on TV is because it makes MONEY.
First, I will answer some of your previous questions.
"And what is the fair value of an item if it isn't what the market determines it is?"
"Who determines what a 'fair value' is?"
Determining the fair value of a product is based on the actual cost of delivering a product to the end user and adding a reasonable profit. The producer sets the price and the consumer can accept or reject the offer. If the offer is rejected the producer can lower the price to minimize his loss, but won't produce any more of the product. If the product is a great success he can produce more of the product. The PRICE is not dependent on the demand for the product. If you produce a 100 units and set a fair price, the first and last unit would sell for the same price. Pricing the last available item higher than the first is a function of greed. The basis of the market system is to extract the most possible profit from every transaction, regardless of cost, effects on the buyer, and societal ramifications. Whether this basis in greed is INTENDED is irrelevant, the market is dominated by men who subordinate all other concerns. In fact, one of the baines of the modern world is the ascendency of marketing - that and the dependence on accounting to make business decisions. In both cases the overriding objective is to make as much money as possible - greed.
"We can't just have people producing stuff that no-one wants"
Sure we can. It happens all the time. It is not the government's job to insure a market for your product. Allowing the highest bidder to purchase scarce resources does not insure their most efficient or beneficial use. Your examples make no sense. You can't justify a system by using selected negative examples from other systems and saying "see, that didn't work, so my way must be best". Take a look at the source of the material you asked me to read.
" I would say this is because there is no such thing as objective morality."
And I would say that's a tremendous load of justifying crap. Any society has shared values. They are reflected in laws, if nowhere else. You can't seriously mean that it is morally acceptable to produce harmful products, hide and distort negative information concerning your product, or break laws to maximize profits. These are all daily occurances in the business world. The application of relativism to business ethics is simply an excuse to replace moral guidelines with the profit motive - greed. I'll give you an example. The airline business, like most these days, claims that customer service is a high priority. There is a window of vulnerability when a customer's bags are unloaded from the plane and moved to baggage claim. Someone else can take the bags before the passenger gets there. Airlines used to hire security people to match bags and claim checks - some airlines still do. Most airlines don't do this anymore. Why? An accounting study determined that considering the legal minimum amount they must pay for lost luggage, it is cheaper for them to pay the minimum than pay for the security to prevent the theft of their customer's personal belongings. The fact that usually the legal minimum doesn't cover the cost of the luggage or mitigate the inconvenience to the passenger doesn't matter to the accountants, only the bottom line.
Look, I know you can't force morals on people. We, as consumers have got to make a stand and let business know that we are sick of the distorting, lying, cutthroat, greedy, methods they employ. We must individually take responsibility for our actions when we represent companies. We must refuse to compromise our personal ethics because "it's my job". And most of all, we must begin to place more value on the common good than profit.
On another subject, I suggest that when researching philosophical topics there are better places to begin than wikipedia. I think that's probably true about most topics, but I only KNOW it's true concerning philosophy. You might try
I read the little religious pamphlet at the end of your link. You missed my point. Why do you accept as a given that the best model for an economy relies on the fundamental goal of greed? There is never a discussion of the right and wrong of a thing, only its potential for profit or loss. Business has demonstrated its disregard for the well being of both customers and employees time after time. It is only when the consequences begin to approach the benefits that most businesses focus on anything but the bottom line. Usually that occurs after as much litigation as possible.
If you don't realize that economics is based on faith and the promise that if you play by the rules you'll get way more than your fair share, then they've got you just where they want you. What's so hard to understand about pricing an item according to its value? If it costs $2 to make and deliver maybe $2.25 or $2.50 is a fair price. That's not the way modern business works though. If they could charge $100 a pop they would. There is a great satisfaction in dealing fairly with people - the respect you command from yourself and everyone around is a direct result of your respect for them. That's the problem with greed side economics - there is no respect shown for the consumer. Sooner or later when you give no respect to others it becomes impossible to have any respect for yourself. After that, all that's left is marketing.
billy - natural born salesman fighting it one day at a time
I think some of what you observed can be attributed to native language. I can't think of a single major development environment that didn't have its basis in English - probably all the way down to machine code. While using the languages can be fairly easy, especially by rote, I suspect that 'thinking out of the box' is easier for native English speakers. I know that there are currently projects using Java, XML, and gettext (GNU) working to allow for individuals to code in their birth languages. Given the differing perspectives influenced by language structure it's a no brainer that a wider array of source languages will allow for more creativity. I wonder what kind of RDB someone whose native tongue has 20 words for 'snow' would create.
My comments on public education were not based on any comparisons. I suspect that Indian public schools share many of the same characteristics as those in America. 'Those who would be kings' are pretty much the same everywhere. They study the same methods, tell the same lies, and have the same need to keep the public from thinking too hard about the status quo. Of course that's a lot easier if the public is never taught critical thinking. It seems to me that in a democratic society the ability to parse a political speech, an advertisement, or a 'crush the Evil Empire' tirade' would be fundamental. It's certainly no harder to learn than trigonometry but is in no way part of the public school curriculum. You DO learn how to show up on time, do specific tasks at specific times, and get along with people you hate. That sounds like job training to me.
billy - who do I work for?.....why truth, justice, and the American Way, of course
Yes. Americans were pissed when jobs went to Mexico. Mexicans were pissed when jobs went to China. China was pissed when jobs went to Vietnam. The Vietnamese will be pissed when the jobs go to robots. The robots probably won't be pissed, but they will be unemployed when all manufactoring is done by 3D desktop printers. The problem stems from the basis of business. How do you make a profit? Get something for less than what it is worth and sell it for more than what it is worth. Prices are not determined by fair value but by what the market will bear. The system rewards not those who produce value, but those who manipulate value. Example? Do you really think it costs a telephone company more to connect a call during the day than at night? Why do aspirin cost $4 each in hospitals? It's simple - greed.
I was wondering how you believe unions fit into the evolution of the workplace. I think what we really need now are CONSUMER unions. Marketing and credit are the modern equivilent to indentured servitude - it will take most of us to break the hold.
billy - ok I admit it...I usually like brand names better
Public education in America was never intended to be for the 'public good'. It has always been intended to provide an educated labor pool.It has always been intended to maintain the status quo and socialize children's behavior to insure a stable work force. They don't teach you to think in public schools - they teach you to behave and accept their version of reality. Which I guess now is that evolution is a theory with about the same chance of validity as devine creation. They even have stickers in the textbooks for proof. There is a reason school teachers and policeman are so low on the pay scale. You get what you pay for.
billy - who worked hard to slip through the cracks
Actually, commercial trucks (18 wheelers) have had devices for quite a while that allow their home offices to track them, upload engine data, and even disable the vehicle. They use GPS and usually use burst transmissions on cell networks. GPS units are also used on railroad cars, construction equipment, even portable water tanks. If you've rented a car lately it's very likely that the rental company has a record of everywhere you drove. The technology is well developed and very robust. It sure didn't seem like a bad idea when I ordered my Lojack.
New technologies need to be tested somewhere. TFA states that about 2 of the 3 million citizens of the UAE drive. Even if IBM only sells the minimum 100,000 units in the initial contract it makes for a hell of a field test. This is more than some simple transmitter/receiver device:
"The telematic device will include several wireless technologies, including GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) cellular capabilities and General Packet Radio Service. Bluetooth and an optional driver-identification feature using RFID also will be on the device, as will IBM's speech software, Via Voice."
That's a lot of functionality to pack into a box and suggests that even more is possible. Especially intriguing is the idea of the "optional" RFID. I doubt if "optional" refers to the driver's decision. This device can determine which lead foot is actually breaking the law. Hopefully the punishment won't be modeled on the traditional penalty for theft imposed in some places in that part of the world. I can see a remote enabled explosive charge mounted on the gas peddle. It would also be possible to plant directed explosive charges (like claymore mines) at strategically selected points. Pissing off the government would be a risky business - after all, the explosion could always be blamed on terrorist hackers. For that matter, terrorists could hack into the system and detonate their own devices with little risk of capture or targeting the wrong person.
If the system works in the UAE you can bet that some incarnation will eventually follow more close to home. Even now police can download the information in your engine control computer. It may be hard to fight legislation initially aimed at drunk drivers or based on "homeland security". If the system is widespread enough it would be a simple matter to track any driver in virtually real time. A disabling function would be easy to include in the sealed manufacturer installed unit. I'm not looking forward to the day when my back seat driver is the government.
billy - it's just an electromagnet officer, really
"That could be one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard,''
That idea could cost us some serious coin, better pretend it's not worth taking seriously.
"Why in the world would you think your (cell) phone would work in your house?" he said. "The customer has come to expect so much. They want it to work in the elevator; they want it to work in the basement."
Jesus, are you people stupid? We will decide what we sell you, you don't actually believe all that crap in the commercials, do you?
"We think there is a deal," he said. "We invest in the business and have the best service. But when you sign up with us, we'd like you stay with us."
We know you don't really pay attention to the contract. Sure we offer better deals to get you to sign up than we do to our loyal long term customers. Once you sign on the dotted line we got you, fuckers.
"because of its national Internet network and lucrative government and corporate contracts. "It would take us longer to build ourselves," he said."
Don't you pay attention? That's how this business works. Somebody builds out the network, then they go belly up, screw the creditors and investors, and sell out to another 'provider' for pennies on the dollar. Presto! Cheap infrastructure! Desperate customers! And we get to renegotiate all those contracts. And their upper management gets a little time off before we hire them.
"We're the right answer,' he said"
Shit, you think WE'RE bad. Those Qwest guys are scum of the Earth.
"Seidenberg encouraged Congress to rewrite the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to decrease the role of the states."
Damn pesky states...always wanting to keep track of our billing and all...like we could always get it right even if we WANTED to. It only makes sense to regulate on the federal level. That way we only to have to bribe people at one level. Much more efficient.
"The first thing we'd do is pre-empt the states,'' Seidenberg said. "That's priority No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3."
Yeah we could concentrate on great service, but if we can take care of all those pesky regulations, we won't have to. Hell, it won't be long till we won't even have to pay for those commercials. There won't be anyone else to choose. Argg...monopoly!
billy - proudly spreading half-assed drivel for 30 years
California Energy Crisis, Montana Power, Harken Energy in Columbia, Peoples Gas, Westar Energy, CMS Energy, Duke Energy, Nicor Energy, Reliant Energy, Dynegy, and...oh yeah...Enron
I guess it's easier for you to believe in THEIR conspiracy (OPEC). Whatever allows you to sleep at night...just a thought though...maybe it's not such a good idea to rely on the companies themselves for accounting data (see above list).
billy - hey...when your heads buried in that sand try not to breathe too deeply
Yeah. I'm always disgusted when the 'experts' spend a half hour explaining why the cost of gas is so high - "investor fears of terrorism", "dollar value erosion", "increase in global demand" - and then you hear...
In our next story, oil company profits in the 3rd quarter set an all time high...
Isn't it funny how those record breaking profits never seem to come up in the discussions about high fuel prices?
Actually, this is the way it usually works...Department G needs a new router. The head of the department goes to the one guy who actually makes things work if, heaven forbid, something occurs that is different from the daily routine. The boss tells the guy to pick a router and lets him know if there are any nonfunctional issues involved in the decision. This could include things like manufacturing location, brands that his bosses' boss has mentioned in meetings, and which vendors give up the good shit. Training in SoCal beats training in Jersey. Raytheon caters lunch for the whole department while Allied Signal only takes a few guys out. Microsoft provides key guys with tablet PCs with cutting edge goodies while OSSGeek.com gives up the t-shirt with the black and white bird on the front and tiny little lights that plug into your USB port. Maybe they have a few meetings, maybe they don't. Important concerns are addressed - like will anyone have to learn anything and "if it crashes can I fix it from home?" Then the geek picks a router.
The next step is submitting the specification requirements for bidding. This requires careful planning, diligent research, and an ever present determination to do right by the public. Fortunately a time honored method exists to streamline the process. They call the vendor of the unit they want and tell them to write a requirement list that fits their product. The list is submitted and, of course, the bidding is open to all. If by some quirk of fate someone OTHER than the chosen company absorbs the development cost and still manages a competitive bid - well the chosen company has proven its technology, has well documented field experience, and has successfully integrated the unit in real world situations - it's a no-brainer.
One good example of the incredible depths this system can reach is that of the famous "$600 Hammer". This was told to me by an engineer working on the wings for the B1 bomber. The B1 uses some pretty exotic materials in its airframe and care must be taken in choosing fasteners to avoid bi-metallic reactions. Obviously the tools for the fasteners must also be taken into account. To make sure this did not become a problem the government stipulated that the company producing the wing must also make the tools used for maintenence and repair. Boeing made B1 wings, they were set up to do so, and they did a hell of a job. Boeing did not make hammers. By the time they had established their hammer making capability, from scratch, the 'cost plus' price for the hammer was $600. Could another company have provided a suitable hammer - perhaps a company that made...say...TOOLS? Why hell yes! Isn't it good to know our government is making sure that nothing but the best is good enough for the American people? Grade A, Number 1, US Government Issue - you betcha.
Thank you for representing our country, and in that regard, me. I in no way equate anyone's service in the military with the government in control. One of the most important ideas in the Constitution is the civilian control of the military. The US military's adherence to that policy, often against their better judgment, is an important guarantee of our freedom. I honor those who protect that freedom.
In the same sense, not all people who oppose some policies of the US are evil, although when they are shooting at you the distinction loses its importance. The liberation of Kuwait CAN NOT be considered as equivalent to the invasion of Iraq. Dismissing the discussion of the right and wrong of the action, I believe the American people were deliberately mislead and cynically manipulated in order to influence their acceptance of the invasion. We cannot allow our government to lie to us. If we do it holds in contempt the sacrifices of those who have fought for our country. Our founding fathers had no illusions about the honor of men who seek power. Neither should we.
I don't think it a total coincidence that in the last election - regardless of outcome - the loser would congratulate the winner with the secret handshake of the Skull and Bones. Maybe that makes me a "tinfoil hat" kind of guy, but then again, I've read Machiavelli and I know what really happened to the Maine.
As far as Google is concerned - you know those guys are gonna pay taxes. Given the company's record it seems a bit over-the-top to call them 'evil'. I'm not sure they can even be called 'sneaky'. After all, they did brag about it in a press release. I guess I'll leave the tax evasion evaluation to the IRS and continue to use google.
Hey if it screws any of those guys who buy up domain names to sell with no intention of ever using them I say huzzah. Maybe the really good names should be assigned like chairs in a band.
"Todays feature bouts are Western Digital challenging Maxtor for harddrive.com...IBM vs Tinkerbell for pixiedust.com...and Rush Limbaugh vs Jerry Falwell for bigfatliar.org...todays special grudge match pits Bill Gates vs Steve Jobs for parc.rip"
Wow, if this is 'evil' what do you call...say...gassing people in ovens, handing out smallpox infected blankets, or downloading music without paying from the internet? Did you just ignore all the posts explaining that they pay taxes other ways? By the way, you have to pay taxes on company 'gifts'. Why is avoiding taxes one way OK but another way 'evil'? These guys are b-b-b-billionaires, maybe they're just too embarassed to take a 150K salary and still look their employees in the eye. I'm sure you take pride in being a somewhat stealthy troll but after Bush's 9/11 speech I pledged myself to fight 'evil' in all its self serving, rabble rousing, ignorant redneck provoking, holier than thou, bogus definitions. Besides, everyone knows the only TRUE evil is putting ads in your sig!
billy - let us pray...our Auditor, who art in heaven
Slashdot Mirror
NO WAY dude.
I'll never try sodomy.
I have a hard enough time keeping my shit together as it is,
billy - OK, sodomy maybe...but how bored was the guy who came up with the gerbil?
Don't forget talk radio.
And the insidious effect of video games on The Youth.
billy - oh what has happened to The Youth?
No.
We hate the game, not the player.
billy - word
I have to disagree. Throughout human history major advances in the awareness of our shared humanity have come from the dreamers at the edges of our cultures. Any idea starts with a few people. If the idea is strong enough and true enough, other people with ability will take up its cause. There was a first time that 2 or 3 men acted together in defiance of the dominant temporal power to assert their rights. As time went by, humanity began to develop the concepts of equality, fairness, and the rights of individuals. Always there were men who had a vision of a better way and such was the power of their vision that other men agreed. These men, often at peril of their lives, challenged us to make a better world. Enough men have taken the challenge through the ages for our civilization to flourish. Just about two hundred and thirty years ago a group of these men with visions found themselves together and they changed the fabric of human interaction forever. They had the idea that each individual man had a right to his own life - and that if enough men of like mind would stand beside them they could make a place without kings or lords - where each man was master of his own destiny. Of course, they wrote the Constitution, rebelled against the lawful government, and took up arms. At that moment those few men defined the moral and ethical beliefs that have shaped our country's journey towards real equality and civil liberty.
Sometimes the journey isn't easy and we've paid the price as individuals and as a nation. We are still embarked on the journey. We are a contentious species and there will always be those who resist change out of fear, or hate, or greed. With a struggle we abolished slavery. As a country we recognized the absolute rationality of tolerance and freedom of expression. We uphold each person's inalienable right to believe and act how they will - restricted only by the compact of laws he accepts as a citizen. Now women and men of all races are equal voting partners in our society. We are judged on our words and our deeds without regard to the family or country of our birth. Together we have decided that discrimination is wrong. You can not be denied the privileges of your citizenship due to race, age, sex, religion, or beliefs. Everyone has the same right to be heard, worship as they will, and choose their lifestyle. We have all agreed with those men with the visions - we have nurtured and enhanced that vision towards its natural realization, even through the inevitable upheaval of change. And we have paid the price with our hearts and our blood.
There are times in the life of ourselves or our country which demand the absolute best we can do. A time of change when we can each aspire to that vision that we take for granted so much of the time. A time when we can be better than the ordinary and the average and look to the dreamers for our inspiration. A time to put aside the fear and ignorance - to reject the transparent attempts at misdirection, manipulation, and control. It's time for us to remember how this country got started and prove that all the sacrifices of Americans to keep it strong have not been wasted. It's time to stand up for the freedom and equality of ALL Americans.
billy - would you go to the users to decide your security policy?
You say...
"What we need is more team effort. More sports. The sex, the booze, this is stuff that currupts people, it is worse than money."
But why in the world would anyone believe that when you also say...
"It is not violent. It is a team sport. If bringing someone down is violent, then society has become filled with pussies. Sorry, but if you cry after being tackeled, that is whack. It is no more violent than in baseball when a pitcher hits a batter."
Talk about 'whack'! That is the kind of attitude that could be harmful to kids. Someone who cries is a "pussy"? Football is a team sport. Football is a violent sport. Tackling is a violent activity. You are a moron. Tell you what - I'll stand 90 feet away from you and you can throw a baseball at me. Then you stand 90 feet away from me and I'll run up and tackle you. Then, after you wake up, we'll compare violence. Then, unlike the 2 or 3 times in a season you might get beaned in baseball, I'll knock you on your ass again, and again, and again. Then it's halftime. And by the way - the reason you see so much sex and booze on TV is because it makes MONEY.
billy - had your bell rung lately?
First, I will answer some of your previous questions.
"And what is the fair value of an item if it isn't what the market determines it is?"
"Who determines what a 'fair value' is?"
Determining the fair value of a product is based on the actual cost of delivering a product to the end user and adding a reasonable profit. The producer sets the price and the consumer can accept or reject the offer. If the offer is rejected the producer can lower the price to minimize his loss, but won't produce any more of the product. If the product is a great success he can produce more of the product. The PRICE is not dependent on the demand for the product. If you produce a 100 units and set a fair price, the first and last unit would sell for the same price. Pricing the last available item higher than the first is a function of greed. The basis of the market system is to extract the most possible profit from every transaction, regardless of cost, effects on the buyer, and societal ramifications. Whether this basis in greed is INTENDED is irrelevant, the market is dominated by men who subordinate all other concerns. In fact, one of the baines of the modern world is the ascendency of marketing - that and the dependence on accounting to make business decisions. In both cases the overriding objective is to make as much money as possible - greed.
"We can't just have people producing stuff that no-one wants"
Sure we can. It happens all the time. It is not the government's job to insure a market for your product. Allowing the highest bidder to purchase scarce resources does not insure their most efficient or beneficial use. Your examples make no sense. You can't justify a system by using selected negative examples from other systems and saying "see, that didn't work, so my way must be best". Take a look at the source of the material you asked me to read.
" I would say this is because there is no such thing as objective morality."
And I would say that's a tremendous load of justifying crap. Any society has shared values. They are reflected in laws, if nowhere else. You can't seriously mean that it is morally acceptable to produce harmful products, hide and distort negative information concerning your product, or break laws to maximize profits. These are all daily occurances in the business world. The application of relativism to business ethics is simply an excuse to replace moral guidelines with the profit motive - greed. I'll give you an example. The airline business, like most these days, claims that customer service is a high priority. There is a window of vulnerability when a customer's bags are unloaded from the plane and moved to baggage claim. Someone else can take the bags before the passenger gets there. Airlines used to hire security people to match bags and claim checks - some airlines still do. Most airlines don't do this anymore. Why? An accounting study determined that considering the legal minimum amount they must pay for lost luggage, it is cheaper for them to pay the minimum than pay for the security to prevent the theft of their customer's personal belongings. The fact that usually the legal minimum doesn't cover the cost of the luggage or mitigate the inconvenience to the passenger doesn't matter to the accountants, only the bottom line.
Look, I know you can't force morals on people. We, as consumers have got to make a stand and let business know that we are sick of the distorting, lying, cutthroat, greedy, methods they employ. We must individually take responsibility for our actions when we represent companies. We must refuse to compromise our personal ethics because "it's my job". And most of all, we must begin to place more value on the common good than profit.
On another subject, I suggest that when researching philosophical topics there are better places to begin than wikipedia. I think that's probably true about most topics, but I only KNOW it's true concerning philosophy. You might try
I read the little religious pamphlet at the end of your link. You missed my point. Why do you accept as a given that the best model for an economy relies on the fundamental goal of greed? There is never a discussion of the right and wrong of a thing, only its potential for profit or loss. Business has demonstrated its disregard for the well being of both customers and employees time after time. It is only when the consequences begin to approach the benefits that most businesses focus on anything but the bottom line. Usually that occurs after as much litigation as possible.
If you don't realize that economics is based on faith and the promise that if you play by the rules you'll get way more than your fair share, then they've got you just where they want you. What's so hard to understand about pricing an item according to its value? If it costs $2 to make and deliver maybe $2.25 or $2.50 is a fair price. That's not the way modern business works though. If they could charge $100 a pop they would. There is a great satisfaction in dealing fairly with people - the respect you command from yourself and everyone around is a direct result of your respect for them. That's the problem with greed side economics - there is no respect shown for the consumer. Sooner or later when you give no respect to others it becomes impossible to have any respect for yourself. After that, all that's left is marketing.
billy - natural born salesman fighting it one day at a time
I think some of what you observed can be attributed to native language. I can't think of a single major development environment that didn't have its basis in English - probably all the way down to machine code. While using the languages can be fairly easy, especially by rote, I suspect that 'thinking out of the box' is easier for native English speakers. I know that there are currently projects using Java, XML, and gettext (GNU) working to allow for individuals to code in their birth languages. Given the differing perspectives influenced by language structure it's a no brainer that a wider array of source languages will allow for more creativity. I wonder what kind of RDB someone whose native tongue has 20 words for 'snow' would create.
My comments on public education were not based on any comparisons. I suspect that Indian public schools share many of the same characteristics as those in America. 'Those who would be kings' are pretty much the same everywhere. They study the same methods, tell the same lies, and have the same need to keep the public from thinking too hard about the status quo. Of course that's a lot easier if the public is never taught critical thinking. It seems to me that in a democratic society the ability to parse a political speech, an advertisement, or a 'crush the Evil Empire' tirade' would be fundamental. It's certainly no harder to learn than trigonometry but is in no way part of the public school curriculum. You DO learn how to show up on time, do specific tasks at specific times, and get along with people you hate. That sounds like job training to me.
billy - who do I work for?.....why truth, justice, and the American Way, of course
Yes. Americans were pissed when jobs went to Mexico. Mexicans were pissed when jobs went to China. China was pissed when jobs went to Vietnam. The Vietnamese will be pissed when the jobs go to robots. The robots probably won't be pissed, but they will be unemployed when all manufactoring is done by 3D desktop printers. The problem stems from the basis of business. How do you make a profit? Get something for less than what it is worth and sell it for more than what it is worth. Prices are not determined by fair value but by what the market will bear. The system rewards not those who produce value, but those who manipulate value. Example? Do you really think it costs a telephone company more to connect a call during the day than at night? Why do aspirin cost $4 each in hospitals? It's simple - greed.
I was wondering how you believe unions fit into the evolution of the workplace. I think what we really need now are CONSUMER unions. Marketing and credit are the modern equivilent to indentured servitude - it will take most of us to break the hold.
billy - ok I admit it...I usually like brand names better
Yoo hoo!
yeah...over here...in the back...
ahh...who do you think pays the patent offices bills?
billy - yes, that's right, we do
Public education in America was never intended to be for the 'public good'. It has always been intended to provide an educated labor pool.It has always been intended to maintain the status quo and socialize children's behavior to insure a stable work force. They don't teach you to think in public schools - they teach you to behave and accept their version of reality. Which I guess now is that evolution is a theory with about the same chance of validity as devine creation. They even have stickers in the textbooks for proof. There is a reason school teachers and policeman are so low on the pay scale. You get what you pay for.
billy - who worked hard to slip through the cracks
Actually, commercial trucks (18 wheelers) have had devices for quite a while that allow their home offices to track them, upload engine data, and even disable the vehicle. They use GPS and usually use burst transmissions on cell networks. GPS units are also used on railroad cars, construction equipment, even portable water tanks. If you've rented a car lately it's very likely that the rental company has a record of everywhere you drove. The technology is well developed and very robust. It sure didn't seem like a bad idea when I ordered my Lojack.
billy - where can I get a tinfoil hat for my car?
In
1. Car drives by sensor
2. Car does not send radio signal
= Prison!
billy - who thinks it's a GOOD thing when
New technologies need to be tested somewhere. TFA states that about 2 of the 3 million citizens of the UAE drive. Even if IBM only sells the minimum 100,000 units in the initial contract it makes for a hell of a field test. This is more than some simple transmitter/receiver device:
"The telematic device will include several wireless technologies, including GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) cellular capabilities and General Packet Radio Service. Bluetooth and an optional driver-identification feature using RFID also will be on the device, as will IBM's speech software, Via Voice."
That's a lot of functionality to pack into a box and suggests that even more is possible. Especially intriguing is the idea of the "optional" RFID. I doubt if "optional" refers to the driver's decision. This device can determine which lead foot is actually breaking the law. Hopefully the punishment won't be modeled on the traditional penalty for theft imposed in some places in that part of the world. I can see a remote enabled explosive charge mounted on the gas peddle. It would also be possible to plant directed explosive charges (like claymore mines) at strategically selected points. Pissing off the government would be a risky business - after all, the explosion could always be blamed on terrorist hackers. For that matter, terrorists could hack into the system and detonate their own devices with little risk of capture or targeting the wrong person.
If the system works in the UAE you can bet that some incarnation will eventually follow more close to home. Even now police can download the information in your engine control computer. It may be hard to fight legislation initially aimed at drunk drivers or based on "homeland security". If the system is widespread enough it would be a simple matter to track any driver in virtually real time. A disabling function would be easy to include in the sealed manufacturer installed unit. I'm not looking forward to the day when my back seat driver is the government.
billy - it's just an electromagnet officer, really
My translation from CEO Speak:
"That could be one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard,''
That idea could cost us some serious coin, better pretend it's not worth taking seriously.
"Why in the world would you think your (cell) phone would work in your house?" he said. "The customer has come to expect so much. They want it to work in the elevator; they want it to work in the basement."
Jesus, are you people stupid? We will decide what we sell you, you don't actually believe all that crap in the commercials, do you?
"We think there is a deal," he said. "We invest in the business and have the best service. But when you sign up with us, we'd like you stay with us."
We know you don't really pay attention to the contract. Sure we offer better deals to get you to sign up than we do to our loyal long term customers. Once you sign on the dotted line we got you, fuckers.
"because of its national Internet network and lucrative government and corporate contracts. "It would take us longer to build ourselves," he said."
Don't you pay attention? That's how this business works. Somebody builds out the network, then they go belly up, screw the creditors and investors, and sell out to another 'provider' for pennies on the dollar. Presto! Cheap infrastructure! Desperate customers! And we get to renegotiate all those contracts. And their upper management gets a little time off before we hire them.
"We're the right answer,' he said"
Shit, you think WE'RE bad. Those Qwest guys are scum of the Earth.
"Seidenberg encouraged Congress to rewrite the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to decrease the role of the states."
Damn pesky states...always wanting to keep track of our billing and all...like we could always get it right even if we WANTED to. It only makes sense to regulate on the federal level. That way we only to have to bribe people at one level. Much more efficient.
"The first thing we'd do is pre-empt the states,'' Seidenberg said. "That's priority No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3."
Yeah we could concentrate on great service, but if we can take care of all those pesky regulations, we won't have to. Hell, it won't be long till we won't even have to pay for those commercials. There won't be anyone else to choose. Argg...monopoly!
billy - proudly spreading half-assed drivel for 30 years
Holy shit...
I can't believe it...
Interesting, Insightful...
And not a single bit of FUD...
did you mean to post this elsewhere?
billy - "we're not worthy...we're not worthy"
Of course...what could I be thinking...
California Energy Crisis, Montana Power, Harken Energy in Columbia, Peoples Gas, Westar Energy, CMS Energy, Duke Energy, Nicor Energy, Reliant Energy, Dynegy, and...oh yeah...Enron
I guess it's easier for you to believe in THEIR conspiracy (OPEC). Whatever allows you to sleep at night...just a thought though...maybe it's not such a good idea to rely on the companies themselves for accounting data (see above list).
billy - hey...when your heads buried in that sand try not to breathe too deeply
Yeah. I'm always disgusted when the 'experts' spend a half hour explaining why the cost of gas is so high - "investor fears of terrorism", "dollar value erosion", "increase in global demand" - and then you hear...
In our next story, oil company profits in the 3rd quarter set an all time high...
Isn't it funny how those record breaking profits never seem to come up in the discussions about high fuel prices?
billy - who does not think it's funny...at all
Actually, this is the way it usually works...Department G needs a new router. The head of the department goes to the one guy who actually makes things work if, heaven forbid, something occurs that is different from the daily routine. The boss tells the guy to pick a router and lets him know if there are any nonfunctional issues involved in the decision. This could include things like manufacturing location, brands that his bosses' boss has mentioned in meetings, and which vendors give up the good shit. Training in SoCal beats training in Jersey. Raytheon caters lunch for the whole department while Allied Signal only takes a few guys out. Microsoft provides key guys with tablet PCs with cutting edge goodies while OSSGeek.com gives up the t-shirt with the black and white bird on the front and tiny little lights that plug into your USB port. Maybe they have a few meetings, maybe they don't. Important concerns are addressed - like will anyone have to learn anything and "if it crashes can I fix it from home?" Then the geek picks a router.
The next step is submitting the specification requirements for bidding. This requires careful planning, diligent research, and an ever present determination to do right by the public. Fortunately a time honored method exists to streamline the process. They call the vendor of the unit they want and tell them to write a requirement list that fits their product. The list is submitted and, of course, the bidding is open to all. If by some quirk of fate someone OTHER than the chosen company absorbs the development cost and still manages a competitive bid - well the chosen company has proven its technology, has well documented field experience, and has successfully integrated the unit in real world situations - it's a no-brainer.
One good example of the incredible depths this system can reach is that of the famous "$600 Hammer". This was told to me by an engineer working on the wings for the B1 bomber. The B1 uses some pretty exotic materials in its airframe and care must be taken in choosing fasteners to avoid bi-metallic reactions. Obviously the tools for the fasteners must also be taken into account. To make sure this did not become a problem the government stipulated that the company producing the wing must also make the tools used for maintenence and repair. Boeing made B1 wings, they were set up to do so, and they did a hell of a job. Boeing did not make hammers. By the time they had established their hammer making capability, from scratch, the 'cost plus' price for the hammer was $600. Could another company have provided a suitable hammer - perhaps a company that made...say...TOOLS? Why hell yes! Isn't it good to know our government is making sure that nothing but the best is good enough for the American people? Grade A, Number 1, US Government Issue - you betcha.
billy - proud to see his tax dollars at work
Wow, I didn't get that at all.
I must be dumb.
billy - proud to be an American
Maybe your engine isn't wrong. Maybe it's just perverted.
billy - hey...that's not sadistic...just kinky
Thank you for representing our country, and in that regard, me. I in no way equate anyone's service in the military with the government in control. One of the most important ideas in the Constitution is the civilian control of the military. The US military's adherence to that policy, often against their better judgment, is an important guarantee of our freedom. I honor those who protect that freedom.
In the same sense, not all people who oppose some policies of the US are evil, although when they are shooting at you the distinction loses its importance. The liberation of Kuwait CAN NOT be considered as equivalent to the invasion of Iraq. Dismissing the discussion of the right and wrong of the action, I believe the American people were deliberately mislead and cynically manipulated in order to influence their acceptance of the invasion. We cannot allow our government to lie to us. If we do it holds in contempt the sacrifices of those who have fought for our country. Our founding fathers had no illusions about the honor of men who seek power. Neither should we.
I don't think it a total coincidence that in the last election - regardless of outcome - the loser would congratulate the winner with the secret handshake of the Skull and Bones. Maybe that makes me a "tinfoil hat" kind of guy, but then again, I've read Machiavelli and I know what really happened to the Maine.
As far as Google is concerned - you know those guys are gonna pay taxes. Given the company's record it seems a bit over-the-top to call them 'evil'. I'm not sure they can even be called 'sneaky'. After all, they did brag about it in a press release. I guess I'll leave the tax evasion evaluation to the IRS and continue to use google.
billy - just kidding about the P2P
"Is that what the Internet is about? Jobs, leisure and pr0n?"
Of course not. You forgot free stuff.
billy - yes...lets NEVER forget free stuff
Hey if it screws any of those guys who buy up domain names to sell with no intention of ever using them I say huzzah. Maybe the really good names should be assigned like chairs in a band.
"Todays feature bouts are Western Digital challenging Maxtor for harddrive.com...IBM vs Tinkerbell for pixiedust.com...and Rush Limbaugh vs Jerry Falwell for bigfatliar.org...todays special grudge match pits Bill Gates vs Steve Jobs for parc.rip"
May the best site win.
billy - wondering if blo.job is still available
"What they did is evil"
Wow, if this is 'evil' what do you call...say...gassing people in ovens, handing out smallpox infected blankets, or downloading music without paying from the internet? Did you just ignore all the posts explaining that they pay taxes other ways? By the way, you have to pay taxes on company 'gifts'. Why is avoiding taxes one way OK but another way 'evil'? These guys are b-b-b-billionaires, maybe they're just too embarassed to take a 150K salary and still look their employees in the eye. I'm sure you take pride in being a somewhat stealthy troll but after Bush's 9/11 speech I pledged myself to fight 'evil' in all its self serving, rabble rousing, ignorant redneck provoking, holier than thou, bogus definitions. Besides, everyone knows the only TRUE evil is putting ads in your sig!
billy - let us pray...our Auditor, who art in heaven