Good point-- there is also a risk of the diver going too flipping insane from narcosis to get the job done also. Still- once the cable route was mapped out, a suicide diver could probably make it down much deeper on a one way trip. Part of the problem is having to return to the surface alive.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-diving-d.html Shows that 130' is the max normal depth for scuba diving- with 300' considered "recordsetting". And apparently anything over 200' is tricky even for people in those old fashioned diving suits.
ADS Spider Submersible Hulls #1 and #2 are now available for sale at USD$399,995. Exceptional depth rating. Only 2 left. Compare with other ADS suits at $1-2 million.
The government should probably track sales of these-- however the old diving suits should be easy to make
I wasn't able to get a hard price on the old style suits but I imagine they could be made for $20k or less.
The parent said "Al Qaeda has the resources to cut..." And I thought "I remember Al Qaeda had resources in the multi-million dollar range. Now the cables are currently unprotected and unarmored and just run across the bottom (or in a very shallow trench in some places). Hmmm. How much would a boat and deep water (say down to 1,000 feet) scuba gear cost-- about $100k. Okay-- multiply that by a factor of 10."
There are other nasty things they can do with regard to the repairing the cables that I'm not even going to mention but they immediately occur to any person familiar with their tactics (now including using females with down's syndrome to carry bombs to blow up... pet market???...-- these guys are relentlessly evil). Ignoring those-- once the cable is located, it can be easily cut in a dozen places. And now the exact cable location is known (GPS-- $100 max) - so if it is repaired it must be guarded constantly or it can be easily cut at an arbitrary time in the future. These cables depend on being left alone- they are no more safe from intentional harm than would be the hanging electric lines in your neighborhood.
Ron is the first candidate I've ever contributed money to.
He is undergoing very consistent and harsh attacks by people trying to suppress him and his view of a truly limited federal government.
You are not crazy-- he won't win the nomination- we must keep pushing him because the further he gets, the more pressure on the other candidates towards his positions.
Only Ron Paul would slow (note; SLOW- not stop!) the growth of the federal government. Ron would get a brutal beating by both parties if he was elected and he would have to compromise a lot to avoid becoming a Jimmy Carter. If he were a clinton type (who compromised so much he came across as more conservative than some republicans but he got the job done) and he was willing to compromise a lot (being a very liberal/socialist libertarian conservative) then he could be one of our great presidents.
So many people refuse to see that a lot of our problems with the rest of the world is that we are killing them and destroying them and meddling with them-- if we would just back off and let them fail or succeed then they would not be so pissed off at us all the time. (I have a theory we mess with them to keep them from becoming "big" threats however-- help them and keep them weak vs not help them and watch them grow strong on their own two feet).
It seems to me that these cuts could be done for a million a piece.
They are the perfect asymetrical target.
Given a man, a saw, a speedboat, a scuba suit and time (to search for the cable), this seems trivial. From what I've heard, one cable leaves out of a particular town (which I know but will leave out here) in california that serves most of india.
And it is not like these are heavily armored cables. You are basically looking at the same problem as the pipelines in south america. Something easy to destroy that goes across hundreds of miles of unguarded wilderness.
Apparently you are not noticing the development of a new entrenched nobility class. You've been successfully brainwashed that 'everyone can be rich' when in reality the same people are staying in power now. It is no coincidence that the same families are serving as our presidents for over a generation now.
Likewise, the executive class has gotten control of the ability to give themselves raises and they are giving themselves raises at the expense of the rest of the citizens. 100 million compensation is completely out of whack even if the company was successful and in many cases, these executives drive the companies into the ground and lay off lots of productive employees to save money so the executives can essentially take those employees pay.
While the government is talking about bailing wallstreet out of the subprime mess that wallstreet created, wallstreet is this year giving themselves some of the larger bonuses they have ever given out. Does this sound like an industry under stress?
We have got to level out the difference between the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor or there will be civil unrest and lots of deaths. Since the wealthy have lost all sense of propriety and are truly in 'let them eat cake' mode, we are going to have to save them from themselves.
Wow! That fit-pc is exactly what we have been looking for (noiseless!) Shame about the 256mb memory limit but otherwise is perfect. For linux that will be enough but would need 512mb to work well with XP (I think-- will read their forums). Thank you SOOOOO much for linking this!
So Vinyl is really also digital data with a much higher resolution than a typical CD.
Somewhere above our current CD data amount (700mb) and below Vinyl (? GB?) would probably be good enough that even those with exceptional hearing could not tell a difference.
Would a live performance have more data than the vinyl recordining? Probably so- because you'd have reflections off of everything in the room coming at your ears from different directions.
As the other guy points out, this was in the late 90s at network lan parties. I know some were after 1998 (cause that's the year I bought my house and the lan parties were in my game room).
CD has advantages- I'm not saying it doesn't. Jeez, why so emotional over the fact that vinyl sounds better to some people? Clearly you have some epenile issues over this issue. Let it go man.
25mb of data just isn't the same as essentially infinite data on vinyl. Analog is infinitely variable- digital is not. And CD resolution is fairly low. Perhaps a DVD audio where they store a gigabyte of data per song would be enough to duplicate vinyl.
Why is it that people go crazy insisting that HD is infinitely better than DVD (and it is basically just double the resolution in both directions) yet saying that increasing audio resolution by over 400% is unnoticable?
You have mistaken me as a person who can tell the difference. I can't.
However, my girlfriend can and has done this and hence she still buys some things on vinyl (despite also owning a hundred cd's). And I had a friend who could see the difference between 60 frames per second and 72 frames per second when we played Doom. To the rest of us both looked glass smooth.
I've known enough people who could hear a difference when I couldn't that I trust that there is a difference.
CD is a smaller subset of data than a vinyl recording is (which is itself a subset of a live performance and lacks some of the 3d positional clues for multi-instrumental songs).
Vinyl is truly continuous like when you wipe waterpaint across a page. CD is like a 600dpi laser print of the same waterpainting from three feet away.
It looks identical to most but there are gaps and some people can see that the printout is not a real watercolor.
And even at full 25mb scale, the CD is still missing some information present in the vinyl. These come across as "warmth". The total harmonic picture if you will.
It might be possible to get closer to vinyl by recording at a higher data rate. And there may be a point where the lost data is truly below human hearing resolution.
I assert there is no need to pay anyone over one million dollars per year. If offered a chance between not working and making a million dollars a year (in a society where greater incomes were taken at a 90% rate), the same people would be doing the same jobs. And the middle and lower classes would be a lot happier.
Yes it is fair that a person who works harder gets more money. However, executive compensation has gone up at 20x the rate of the general populace since the late 1980's. Essentially, a very tiny group of 500 to 1,000 people have found a way to take the income of 500,000 other citizens. It was not historically that way and it is dangerous for society for it to continue. Anyone making 160 million a year in a company that is losing money and has a sharply declining stock price is evidence that we need a severe change.
I advocate an inflation indexed 75% tax on income above 10 million a year. The thing is, once everyone is limited, the price of everything shifts around to match. If the top income is 300 million a year, then the best condo may run 30 million a year-- if the top income is 30 million a year, then the best condo will probably run 3 million a year. Money is just a token.
The first and most critical for this point is that wealthy artists lose the drive to create and create at a slower rate. For example, actors in the 30's and 40's might be in 6 to 10 pictures PER year. These days, most successful actors make a movie every two to three years. You want the reward to be motivating but still leave the artist hungry.
We agree to disagree. Historically when the wealth gets too unevenly distributed very bad things happen to the wealthy (heads will roll). Essentially, once one group wins too much either the government fails or society fails. The wealthy are much more likely to have a happy life if they are not too greedy. But they always are and at some point we will be looking at 70% to 90% taxes on the wealthy again as a result or civil violence.
Beethoven wrote the concerto in 1792 as an exercise under Haydn and revised the second movement the following year. It would be several more years before he published his Opus No. 1, announcing himself as a composer.
The only known copy of the oboe concerto vanished from a Vienna publishing house in the 1840s. Its existence was confirmed in 1935, when researchers found an exchange of letters between Haydn and Beethoven's sponsor, in which the Austrian composer seeks a further stipend for his young German pupil.
---
When we post on slashdot, we are under the social contract of "I want to discuss things on slashdot so I will let anyone read my stuff for free". We may even have a site agreement that the site can use our posts (given the goofy state of copyright). Slashdot is akin to a discussion. However, it is possible that if someone reused a post in its entirety and started making a ton of money, that we could sue them for a share.
---
If society does not reward for music (movies, books, etc.) at all, then some music will be produced (say "X") If society rewards for music, then more music will be produced. At the tipping point of compensation, the maximum amount of music will be created. If society rewards too much for music (etc.), then less music will be produced because the artists get wealthy too soon and lose the motivation to keep creating.
--- If beethoven had never found a sponsor, he would have written at most one or two symphonies. Which one of them are you willing to give up so you can take his work for free?
No you are correct. And this argument is why I do not download songs and movies in print unless I purchase a copy. I have downloaded movies which I purchased because I wanted to format shift them for travel.
As far as the reasonable profit goes- yes the band can charge anything they want. However, the compensation gets all out of whack with our larger world population of consumers. We have drifted as a society to a position where we tolerate (encourage?) extreme differences in wealth. I think this position is destructive to the social fabric and will have bad results in the long term. I would be socialist and say, if you make above a certain amount- we take it as taxes and use it for social services (say college and small business low interest loans) to reduce the gap between rich and poor.
Copyright law does not exist to make the band rich- it exists to benefit society.
I agree. This is the category most of my copyrighted material that I download falls. Material which I could not buy except as a collector's item simply because the copyright holders will not make copies of it for me to buy.
I would say that by making copies you are destroying the collectible value of the item. For example, once i was able to download the "warlord" comic book series, I was no longer interested in paying $3 for a 20 year old physical out of print comic book. And that would slightly destroy the overall comic market (as collectors stopped buying a few extra copies).
As far as taking a current run movie- I disagree with you. If you get a copy and enjoy it, you morally deserve to give some kind of compensation to the creators of that material. Perhaps you could donate a couple hundred bucks a year to the actors retirement fund as a start.
You only have to turn it around and ask if it would be fair for me to take the results of three week's worth of your work without your permission and without any compensation to see how immoral you would consider it.
I (who download copyrighted material in some cases) would be pissed and feel like I was being treated unfairly.
We do not get to "pick and choose" the parts of society which we will obey. You pay your taxes. You obey criminal law. You get the benefits of society in return (paved roads, doctors, warriors to protect your country, etc.) You are born into a "social contract" and you are stuck with it. You can follow it, you can work to change it, you can engage in disobedience and suffer the consequences, or you can leave and go somewhere else. You can't disobey it, flaunt the fact (because you are stupid and forgot the difference between right and wrong and legal and illegal) and then be excused from suffering the consequences.
So if you can't change a part of the law you disagree with then you damn well better be discreet and keep in mind that what you are doing is illegal so your life isn't destroyed.
And by the social contract, creators do have a legal right to be compensated for their work. We give them that right so they will create more stuff for society. We do not give it to them so they and their heirs to the 7th generation can become fabulously wealthy.
This (admittedly cowardly) anonymous poster is not a troll. The point is valid tho a little rude.
Any one using torrents to download copyrighted material, especially recently released copyrighted material, should never lose sight of the fact that what they are doing is illegal and probably at least a little immoral. You have to balance the immoral hijacking of the copyright laws against taking the results of peoples work without compensating them. Likewise there is the issue of artificially inflated monopoly prices vs what the real cost of production is.
There is a strong argument that 50 year old songs by dead artists should be in public domain. Until our government representatives were bribed by rich corporations (i.e. disney, et al) copyright law was roughly 28 years. Numerous egregious examples ("Happy Birthday", "It's a wonderful life", "Mickey Mouse") show clearly how this area of the law is being abused at a large cost to society which has a reasonable expectation that works will go into public domain where they can be used to create new art.
I would also say that when employees in this industry make over a million dollars a year, they are being overcompensated and there must be some artificial reason why which will eventually be flattened.
Actually, If we assert that Mormons had a particular behavior and doctrine, then the burden of proof is on us.
It is well known*, for example, that Mormons in the 1880's loved beating their wives. However, I have to prove that assertion-- they do not have to disprove it.
*well known within the body of this particular post but probably untrue everywhere else in the world.
Actually, By hobbes leviathan, that's exactly what they do.
Underlying any system is the fact that if you push hard enough, people will rise up and kill you and take all your stuff.
The wealthy in america have gotten so greedy and deluded that they seem to think they can take 95% of the wealth and keep it and the other 98% of the country is going to allow them to get away with it forever.
What made america work was that things were fair. They haven't been remotely fair for the last 15 years or so.
I work with a 61 year old guy that puts many of the 20 year olds at my company to shame. And he knows the business rules so well that even if they worked the same hours he would smoke most of them. And the quality of work he puts out is very high.
Slashdot Mirror
Good point-- there is also a risk of the diver going too flipping insane from narcosis to get the job done also.
Still- once the cable route was mapped out, a suicide diver could probably make it down much deeper on a one way trip. Part of the problem is having to return to the surface alive.
Okay... so decided I would do a little digging.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-diving-d.html
Shows that 130' is the max normal depth for scuba diving- with 300' considered "recordsetting".
And apparently anything over 200' is tricky even for people in those old fashioned diving suits.
You would need a bigger more noticable boat to get to depts 300' to 2300'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_diving_suit
http://www.sub-find.com/newt_suit.htm
These cost $400k
ADS Spider Submersible Hulls #1 and #2 are now available for sale at USD$399,995. Exceptional depth rating. Only 2 left. Compare with other ADS suits at $1-2 million.
The government should probably track sales of these-- however the old diving suits should be easy to make
I wasn't able to get a hard price on the old style suits but I imagine they could be made for $20k or less.
The parent said "Al Qaeda has the resources to cut..."
... pet market???...-- these guys are relentlessly evil). Ignoring those-- once the cable is located, it can be easily cut in a dozen places. And now the exact cable location is known (GPS-- $100 max) - so if it is repaired it must be guarded constantly or it can be easily cut at an arbitrary time in the future. These cables depend on being left alone- they are no more safe from intentional harm than would be the hanging electric lines in your neighborhood.
And I thought "I remember Al Qaeda had resources in the multi-million dollar range. Now the cables are currently unprotected and unarmored and just run across the bottom (or in a very shallow trench in some places). Hmmm. How much would a boat and deep water (say down to 1,000 feet) scuba gear cost-- about $100k. Okay-- multiply that by a factor of 10."
There are other nasty things they can do with regard to the repairing the cables that I'm not even going to mention but they immediately occur to any person familiar with their tactics (now including using females with down's syndrome to carry bombs to blow up
I agree.
Ron is the first candidate I've ever contributed money to.
He is undergoing very consistent and harsh attacks by people trying to suppress him and his view of a truly limited federal government.
You are not crazy-- he won't win the nomination- we must keep pushing him because the further he gets, the more pressure on the other candidates towards his positions.
Only Ron Paul would slow (note; SLOW- not stop!) the growth of the federal government. Ron would get a brutal beating by both parties if he was elected and he would have to compromise a lot to avoid becoming a Jimmy Carter. If he were a clinton type (who compromised so much he came across as more conservative than some republicans but he got the job done) and he was willing to compromise a lot (being a very liberal/socialist libertarian conservative) then he could be one of our great presidents.
So many people refuse to see that a lot of our problems with the rest of the world is that we are killing them and destroying them and meddling with them-- if we would just back off and let them fail or succeed then they would not be so pissed off at us all the time. (I have a theory we mess with them to keep them from becoming "big" threats however-- help them and keep them weak vs not help them and watch them grow strong on their own two feet).
If torrents are successfully outlawed, a new legal protocol will be widespread within 90 days.
It seems to me that these cuts could be done for a million a piece.
They are the perfect asymetrical target.
Given a man, a saw, a speedboat, a scuba suit and time (to search for the cable), this seems trivial. From what I've heard, one cable leaves out of a particular town (which I know but will leave out here) in california that serves most of india.
And it is not like these are heavily armored cables. You are basically looking at the same problem as the pipelines in south america. Something easy to destroy that goes across hundreds of miles of unguarded wilderness.
Apparently you are not noticing the development of a new entrenched nobility class. You've been successfully brainwashed that 'everyone can be rich' when in reality the same people are staying in power now. It is no coincidence that the same families are serving as our presidents for over a generation now.
Likewise, the executive class has gotten control of the ability to give themselves raises and they are giving themselves raises at the expense of the rest of the citizens. 100 million compensation is completely out of whack even if the company was successful and in many cases, these executives drive the companies into the ground and lay off lots of productive employees to save money so the executives can essentially take those employees pay.
While the government is talking about bailing wallstreet out of the subprime mess that wallstreet created, wallstreet is this year giving themselves some of the larger bonuses they have ever given out. Does this sound like an industry under stress?
We have got to level out the difference between the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor or there will be civil unrest and lots of deaths. Since the wealthy have lost all sense of propriety and are truly in 'let them eat cake' mode, we are going to have to save them from themselves.
I think you mean, uplifting spirits.
Wow!
That fit-pc is exactly what we have been looking for (noiseless!)
Shame about the 256mb memory limit but otherwise is perfect.
For linux that will be enough but would need 512mb to work well with XP (I think-- will read their forums).
Thank you SOOOOO much for linking this!
That's the key problem.
If MS had been a white hat in the 90's, they would own this market today.
Like so many businesses, they went for short term profit at long term cost.
I would never use MS search results because I do not trust them to give me fair results.
They scammed too many times.
You have an excellent point!
So Vinyl is really also digital data with a much higher resolution than a typical CD.
Somewhere above our current CD data amount (700mb) and below Vinyl (? GB?) would probably be good enough that even those with exceptional hearing could not tell a difference.
Would a live performance have more data than the vinyl recordining? Probably so- because you'd have reflections off of everything in the room coming at your ears from different directions.
As the other guy points out, this was in the late 90s at network lan parties. I know some were after 1998 (cause that's the year I bought my house and the lan parties were in my game room).
CD has advantages- I'm not saying it doesn't. Jeez, why so emotional over the fact that vinyl sounds better to some people? Clearly you have some epenile issues over this issue. Let it go man.
25mb of data just isn't the same as essentially infinite data on vinyl. Analog is infinitely variable- digital is not. And CD resolution is fairly low. Perhaps a DVD audio where they store a gigabyte of data per song would be enough to duplicate vinyl.
Why is it that people go crazy insisting that HD is infinitely better than DVD (and it is basically just double the resolution in both directions) yet saying that increasing audio resolution by over 400% is unnoticable?
You have mistaken me as a person who can tell the difference. I can't.
However, my girlfriend can and has done this and hence she still buys some things on vinyl (despite also owning a hundred cd's). And I had a friend who could see the difference between 60 frames per second and 72 frames per second when we played Doom. To the rest of us both looked glass smooth.
I've known enough people who could hear a difference when I couldn't that I trust that there is a difference.
CD is a smaller subset of data than a vinyl recording is (which is itself a subset of a live performance and lacks some of the 3d positional clues for multi-instrumental songs).
Vinyl is truly continuous like when you wipe waterpaint across a page.
CD is like a 600dpi laser print of the same waterpainting from three feet away.
It looks identical to most but there are gaps and some people can see that the printout is not a real watercolor.
And even at full 25mb scale, the CD is still missing some information present in the vinyl. These come across as "warmth". The total harmonic picture if you will.
It might be possible to get closer to vinyl by recording at a higher data rate. And there may be a point where the lost data is truly below human hearing resolution.
Correct.
I assert there is no need to pay anyone over one million dollars per year. If offered a chance between not working and making a million dollars a year (in a society where greater incomes were taken at a 90% rate), the same people would be doing the same jobs. And the middle and lower classes would be a lot happier.
Yes it is fair that a person who works harder gets more money. However, executive compensation has gone up at 20x the rate of the general populace since the late 1980's. Essentially, a very tiny group of 500 to 1,000 people have found a way to take the income of 500,000 other citizens. It was not historically that way and it is dangerous for society for it to continue. Anyone making 160 million a year in a company that is losing money and has a sharply declining stock price is evidence that we need a severe change.
I advocate an inflation indexed 75% tax on income above 10 million a year. The thing is, once everyone is limited, the price of everything shifts around to match. If the top income is 300 million a year, then the best condo may run 30 million a year-- if the top income is 30 million a year, then the best condo will probably run 3 million a year. Money is just a token.
There are two problems with overcompensation.
The first and most critical for this point is that wealthy artists lose the drive to create and create at a slower rate. For example, actors in the 30's and 40's might be in 6 to 10 pictures PER year. These days, most successful actors make a movie every two to three years. You want the reward to be motivating but still leave the artist hungry.
We agree to disagree. Historically when the wealth gets too unevenly distributed very bad things happen to the wealthy (heads will roll). Essentially, once one group wins too much either the government fails or society fails.
The wealthy are much more likely to have a happy life if they are not too greedy. But they always are and at some point we will be looking at 70% to 90% taxes on the wealthy again as a result or civil violence.
Beethoven and others were sponsored by rich merchants and nobles. It takes a lot of money to support a person writing music full time.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-03-02-beethoven_x.htm
Beethoven wrote the concerto in 1792 as an exercise under Haydn and revised the second movement the following year. It would be several more years before he published his Opus No. 1, announcing himself as a composer.
The only known copy of the oboe concerto vanished from a Vienna publishing house in the 1840s. Its existence was confirmed in 1935, when researchers found an exchange of letters between Haydn and Beethoven's sponsor, in which the Austrian composer seeks a further stipend for his young German pupil.
---
When we post on slashdot, we are under the social contract of "I want to discuss things on slashdot so I will let anyone read my stuff for free". We may even have a site agreement that the site can use our posts (given the goofy state of copyright). Slashdot is akin to a discussion. However, it is possible that if someone reused a post in its entirety and started making a ton of money, that we could sue them for a share.
---
If society does not reward for music (movies, books, etc.) at all, then some music will be produced (say "X")
If society rewards for music, then more music will be produced.
At the tipping point of compensation, the maximum amount of music will be created.
If society rewards too much for music (etc.), then less music will be produced because the artists get wealthy too soon and lose the motivation to keep creating.
---
If beethoven had never found a sponsor, he would have written at most one or two symphonies. Which one of them are you willing to give up so you can take his work for free?
No you are correct. And this argument is why I do not download songs and movies in print unless I purchase a copy. I have downloaded movies which I purchased because I wanted to format shift them for travel.
As far as the reasonable profit goes- yes the band can charge anything they want. However, the compensation gets all out of whack with our larger world population of consumers. We have drifted as a society to a position where we tolerate (encourage?) extreme differences in wealth. I think this position is destructive to the social fabric and will have bad results in the long term. I would be socialist and say, if you make above a certain amount- we take it as taxes and use it for social services (say college and small business low interest loans) to reduce the gap between rich and poor.
Copyright law does not exist to make the band rich- it exists to benefit society.
I agree. This is the category most of my copyrighted material that I download falls. Material which I could not buy except as a collector's item simply because the copyright holders will not make copies of it for me to buy.
I would say that by making copies you are destroying the collectible value of the item. For example, once i was able to download the "warlord" comic book series, I was no longer interested in paying $3 for a 20 year old physical out of print comic book. And that would slightly destroy the overall comic market (as collectors stopped buying a few extra copies).
As far as taking a current run movie- I disagree with you. If you get a copy and enjoy it, you morally deserve to give some kind of compensation to the creators of that material. Perhaps you could donate a couple hundred bucks a year to the actors retirement fund as a start.
Intrinsic,
You only have to turn it around and ask if it would be fair for me to take the results of three week's worth of your work without your permission and without any compensation to see how immoral you would consider it.
I (who download copyrighted material in some cases) would be pissed and feel like I was being treated unfairly.
We do not get to "pick and choose" the parts of society which we will obey. You pay your taxes. You obey criminal law. You get the benefits of society in return (paved roads, doctors, warriors to protect your country, etc.) You are born into a "social contract" and you are stuck with it. You can follow it, you can work to change it, you can engage in disobedience and suffer the consequences, or you can leave and go somewhere else. You can't disobey it, flaunt the fact (because you are stupid and forgot the difference between right and wrong and legal and illegal) and then be excused from suffering the consequences.
So if you can't change a part of the law you disagree with then you damn well better be discreet and keep in mind that what you are doing is illegal so your life isn't destroyed.
And by the social contract, creators do have a legal right to be compensated for their work. We give them that right so they will create more stuff for society. We do not give it to them so they and their heirs to the 7th generation can become fabulously wealthy.
This (admittedly cowardly) anonymous poster is not a troll.
The point is valid tho a little rude.
Any one using torrents to download copyrighted material, especially recently released copyrighted material, should never lose sight of the fact that what they are doing is illegal and probably at least a little immoral. You have to balance the immoral hijacking of the copyright laws against taking the results of peoples work without compensating them. Likewise there is the issue of artificially inflated monopoly prices vs what the real cost of production is.
There is a strong argument that 50 year old songs by dead artists should be in public domain. Until our government representatives were bribed by rich corporations (i.e. disney, et al) copyright law was roughly 28 years. Numerous egregious examples ("Happy Birthday", "It's a wonderful life", "Mickey Mouse") show clearly how this area of the law is being abused at a large cost to society which has a reasonable expectation that works will go into public domain where they can be used to create new art.
I would also say that when employees in this industry make over a million dollars a year, they are being overcompensated and there must be some artificial reason why which will eventually be flattened.
Actually,
If we assert that Mormons had a particular behavior and doctrine, then the burden of proof is on us.
It is well known*, for example, that Mormons in the 1880's loved beating their wives. However, I have to prove that assertion-- they do not have to disprove it.
*well known within the body of this particular post but probably untrue everywhere else in the world.
Actually,
By hobbes leviathan, that's exactly what they do.
Underlying any system is the fact that if you push hard enough, people will rise up and kill you and take all your stuff.
The wealthy in america have gotten so greedy and deluded that they seem to think they can take 95% of the wealth and keep it and the other 98% of the country is going to allow them to get away with it forever.
What made america work was that things were fair. They haven't been remotely fair for the last 15 years or so.
Younger is not equal to harder working.
Darn slashdot eating my brackets.... I knew how to stop it once but forgot.
\
">
Younger harder-working.
I work with a 61 year old guy that puts many of the 20 year olds at my company to shame.
And he knows the business rules so well that even if they worked the same hours he would smoke most of them.
And the quality of work he puts out is very high.