Suing enthusiasts who want nothing more than to have an early little taste of their software is a good way to hurt a brand that depends almost entirely emotion and public perception of "coolness."
Nobody buys Apple products just because they believe Apple are some sort of corporate saint that would never sue anybody. And nobody cares about bloggers. So, there's no possible damage from these actions. Do you really think people would stop buying Apple products over this storm in a teacup? Where are they going to get their computers and MP3 players from then - some other big corporation, who also sues people? Last time I checked, the friendly old guy in the corner store doesn't carve processors from wood - the only way to obtain a processor is from a large corporation.
The fact that you don't see the welfare programs LBJ started as massive socialism shows how skewed your perspective is.
No, it's just reality. Socialism is a specific political and economic system. Welfare and a social safety net is not the same thing as socialism, and they exist in many capitalist countries.
But it is close enough for me. With up to 70% tax rates in the 1980's, they were basically taking everything the wealthy made (and a bunch of what the middle class made) and giving it away to the rest of the country.
So, because it was poorly implemented (and the economy wasn't going through a great period anyway) that means the idea of welfare is completely wrong? There's plenty of fucked up shit happening today, lots of economic problems, I guess that means that capitalism is a total failure, and should be dismantled, eh? And I guess anyone who wants to help others, or not live in a miserable dog-eat-dog society is some kind of raving socialist? That seems to be the gist of your earlier "think of the children" comment.
Care to elaborate? I'm pretty sure I have great social skills, but if I don't, please enlighten me! I don't see how any part of my post alludes to a lack of social skills.
America is capitalistic so the socialism tends to camouflage itself as "Think of the Children" and "Save our Seniors from Destitution (after they partied their savings away)."
Eh? What do those sentiments have to do with socialism?
We had a massive experiment with socialism starting with lyndon johnson and it failed horribly. it probably destroyed an entire generation of the poor.
You're joking aren't you? Lyndon Johnson was a socialist? In what way? That you would even consider his policies to be socialist just demonstrates how skewed your perception is, and how right-wing America is. I mean, really. Socialist??? For what reason?
the blanket opinion that "organized sports are stupid" seems to me to be a byproduct of some sort of elitism.
Or perhaps it has nothing to do with elitism, and the person just doesn't like organized sports? Factually speaking, they are stupid - they aren't very intellectual exercises, and have little purpose.
But holding that opinion doesn't mean that one has to be antagonistic towards people who enjoy sports. I don't like competitive spectator sports (although I do play golf and cycle for fitness, fun and socialization). But I don't have any problem with those who do. Am I elitist because watching spectator sports just doesn't do anything for me?
If more people believed in principles rather than rules, the world would be a better place.
What if they believed in the principle of slavery? Or the principle of murdering everybody with a "k" in their name? The principles of white supremacy and eugenics?
What's wrong with going to raves when you're 50? I know plenty of people older than that who go. It's good exercise, keeps you young. Or are "old people" (50 is not very old) just supposed to lead quiet boring lives?
America has always been very conservative. The "slightly left of center" is actually not really left at all. In reality, we have slightly right to extreme right-wing politics, with barely any left wing at all. Yes, liberalism was pretty popular in the 60s and 70s, but liberalism is not the same as being left wing. And as always, the majority is corporate-driven towards capitalism and consumption. The media is a very conservative establishment. If the media was left-wing, why didn't we see news naked anchors, and talk show hosts smoking pot or advocating socialism from the 60s to the 90s?
Brainwashing happens when "facts" are repeated constantly without refutation
That's not the only way it can happen. It can also happen with a false sense of controversy, emotional appeals, etc. It can easily happen by exploiting someone's sense of "listening to many sources" as you advocate.
I am suggesting you avoid that by listening to many sources which will most likely prevent the brainwash from taking place. Then, you're left with facts that you can weigh for yourself.
But many sources are not factual. And many people will believe the bullshit sources that appeal to them, rather than the credible ones. So, often adding sources that lack credibility only increases people's gullibility, and it muddies the waters of debate. This is easy to observe in the current media/political climate - so much time is spent on bullshit "issues" and arguments that shouldn't even be happening in the first place - while serious issues are ignored. This is largely enabled by the "we must hear from all sides" mentality. It gives people without credibility a soapbox.
Seriously, the phrase for this 'Emotional Intelligence' and it's in short supply for most geeks/nerds/etc.
I don't think "emotional intelligence" has much to do with business skills. If anything, to succeed in business you need to mute your emotional intelligence, your conscience, etc. Successful businesspeople actually tend toward the pyschotic.
Wouldn't the fairness doctrine only apply to news shows, and not editorial or entertainment content? Regardless, I doubt it would have any effect, as it would be basically unenforceable.
Historically, the media presented the "middle" as the "right" and then of course the "left" as the middle.... Personally, I think the right wing media flourished because it was suppressed so long
Such hilarity! Are you trying to be funny, or do you actually believe this backwards fantasy? Or do you live in bizarro world?
There are many perspectives, and the more you see the more you're immune from political trickery and double-talk.
Why? What if you spend so much time listening to alternative (and wrong) perspectives, that you lose sight of what's correct - and become even more susceptible to double-talk? Many people are brilliant at taking a simple issue, and persuading people to adopt strange convoluted positions on it.
What about the Timecube? The Timecube is humanity's future, and your denial of it demonstrates that you are ACADEMICALLY RETARDED and subject to the whims of JESUS HOMOSEXUALITY under the influence of the WORLD BANK.
I think Tubes looks like it will catch on. If sites like Facebook and Technorati implement some hooks into it, there is no telling where this could go.
To Alaska, perhaps? But then there probably wouldn't be anything at the other end.
No, it didn't take two days to get an email, it took two days to get "an internet." I'm downloading the internet right now, and it's been taking a lot longer than two days. That guy must have some hella tubes for it to only take two days.
Slashdot Mirror
42.
Nobody buys Apple products just because they believe Apple are some sort of corporate saint that would never sue anybody. And nobody cares about bloggers. So, there's no possible damage from these actions. Do you really think people would stop buying Apple products over this storm in a teacup? Where are they going to get their computers and MP3 players from then - some other big corporation, who also sues people? Last time I checked, the friendly old guy in the corner store doesn't carve processors from wood - the only way to obtain a processor is from a large corporation.
No, it's just reality. Socialism is a specific political and economic system. Welfare and a social safety net is not the same thing as socialism, and they exist in many capitalist countries.
But it is close enough for me. With up to 70% tax rates in the 1980's, they were basically taking everything the wealthy made (and a bunch of what the middle class made) and giving it away to the rest of the country.So, because it was poorly implemented (and the economy wasn't going through a great period anyway) that means the idea of welfare is completely wrong? There's plenty of fucked up shit happening today, lots of economic problems, I guess that means that capitalism is a total failure, and should be dismantled, eh? And I guess anyone who wants to help others, or not live in a miserable dog-eat-dog society is some kind of raving socialist? That seems to be the gist of your earlier "think of the children" comment.
The tone seemed somewhat anti-social to me.
Eh? What do those sentiments have to do with socialism?
We had a massive experiment with socialism starting with lyndon johnson and it failed horribly. it probably destroyed an entire generation of the poor.You're joking aren't you? Lyndon Johnson was a socialist? In what way? That you would even consider his policies to be socialist just demonstrates how skewed your perception is, and how right-wing America is. I mean, really. Socialist??? For what reason?
He's socially related to the study of disease? What does that even mean? He knows doctors socially?
So, if someone gets raped or shot, it is their fault for not evading the rapist/bullet?
Whoa! That's a really time-consuming Google search.
Yes, but you don't appear to be one of them.
Or perhaps it has nothing to do with elitism, and the person just doesn't like organized sports? Factually speaking, they are stupid - they aren't very intellectual exercises, and have little purpose.
But holding that opinion doesn't mean that one has to be antagonistic towards people who enjoy sports. I don't like competitive spectator sports (although I do play golf and cycle for fitness, fun and socialization). But I don't have any problem with those who do. Am I elitist because watching spectator sports just doesn't do anything for me?
What if they believed in the principle of slavery? Or the principle of murdering everybody with a "k" in their name? The principles of white supremacy and eugenics?
What's wrong with going to raves when you're 50? I know plenty of people older than that who go. It's good exercise, keeps you young. Or are "old people" (50 is not very old) just supposed to lead quiet boring lives?
America has always been very conservative. The "slightly left of center" is actually not really left at all. In reality, we have slightly right to extreme right-wing politics, with barely any left wing at all. Yes, liberalism was pretty popular in the 60s and 70s, but liberalism is not the same as being left wing. And as always, the majority is corporate-driven towards capitalism and consumption. The media is a very conservative establishment. If the media was left-wing, why didn't we see news naked anchors, and talk show hosts smoking pot or advocating socialism from the 60s to the 90s?
That's not the only way it can happen. It can also happen with a false sense of controversy, emotional appeals, etc. It can easily happen by exploiting someone's sense of "listening to many sources" as you advocate.
I am suggesting you avoid that by listening to many sources which will most likely prevent the brainwash from taking place. Then, you're left with facts that you can weigh for yourself.But many sources are not factual. And many people will believe the bullshit sources that appeal to them, rather than the credible ones. So, often adding sources that lack credibility only increases people's gullibility, and it muddies the waters of debate. This is easy to observe in the current media/political climate - so much time is spent on bullshit "issues" and arguments that shouldn't even be happening in the first place - while serious issues are ignored. This is largely enabled by the "we must hear from all sides" mentality. It gives people without credibility a soapbox.
I don't think "emotional intelligence" has much to do with business skills. If anything, to succeed in business you need to mute your emotional intelligence, your conscience, etc. Successful businesspeople actually tend toward the pyschotic.
I think your .sig could do with a better compression method.
Wouldn't the fairness doctrine only apply to news shows, and not editorial or entertainment content? Regardless, I doubt it would have any effect, as it would be basically unenforceable.
Such hilarity! Are you trying to be funny, or do you actually believe this backwards fantasy? Or do you live in bizarro world?
I see. You're arguing for the side that does not exist. That makes perfect sense!
This statement would only make sense if "ironically" actually meant "predictably," which it doesn't.
Why? What if you spend so much time listening to alternative (and wrong) perspectives, that you lose sight of what's correct - and become even more susceptible to double-talk? Many people are brilliant at taking a simple issue, and persuading people to adopt strange convoluted positions on it.
I do.
What about the Timecube? The Timecube is humanity's future, and your denial of it demonstrates that you are ACADEMICALLY RETARDED and subject to the whims of JESUS HOMOSEXUALITY under the influence of the WORLD BANK.
To Alaska, perhaps? But then there probably wouldn't be anything at the other end.
No, it didn't take two days to get an email, it took two days to get "an internet." I'm downloading the internet right now, and it's been taking a lot longer than two days. That guy must have some hella tubes for it to only take two days.