I'm for competition and against collusion, but that's supposed to be about the way companies sell products. How is poaching employees supposed to be good for the consumer?
To be a consumer, one needs to be a producer first (credit notwithstanding). Now, if there is a very limited number of buyers for what one produces (oligopsony) then the price you could sell your goods or services would tend to be lower.
Lower input prices (employees) generally lead to lower consumer prices.
In any case, antitrust is a waste of resources since cartels are inherently unstable barring state intervention.
It isn't just Apple that Samsung has a tendency to "draw inspiration" from. (...) So before the usual anti-Apple rhetoric starts a-flyin', keep in mind that Samsung is one of those companies whose business is centered on making commodity knock-offs of popular products. I don't blame Apple for suing to protect Jonathan Ive's design work, because if one of the knock-offs is low quality or problematic, it can end up hurting Apple's brand.
So if say, Apple (ahem) "draws inspiration" from an inferior product and makes it higher quality, then would the "inspirer" not have grounds to sue since it can only enhance its brand?
I hold that anonymous allegations, however defamatory, should not be prosecutable. It's anonymous, wouldn't a reasonable person just dismiss any such allegation considering the source?
Jobs created don't provide the overall picture of an economic effect. Actual spending does.
The main benefit of the data center is the very existence of the data center, which is of value to many people (to varying degrees).
Professional "economists" would have a much harder time trying to pull the wool over people's eyes if everyone just learned the meanings of and the differences between four simple concepts: production, consumption, spending and saving.
From TFA:"Bizarrely, computer analysis of the data also showed that jokes containing 103 words were thought to be especially funny. The winning "hunters" joke was 102 words long.
[...] He gasps: "My friend is dead! What can I do?" The operator says: "Calm down, I can help. First, let's make sure he's dead." There is a silence, then a gunshot is heard. Back on the phone, the guy says: "OK, so now what?
It's bad because Liberty is an unalienable right, and the government has no business deciding what you should study.
In fact, government has no business deciding if we should study. As it is, providing public education (K-12) and making it mandatory crowds out private education and productive labor.
We are tool-builders, and we created money as a tool to help us. Instead we find economists treating money as a God to which we must sacrifice humans (not them, but other, poorer, humans).
Money (understood as the most widely accepted commodity for trade) was a great invention. States have co-opted the power of this tool through fiat money. Economists do not worship money but are rather the (paid for) high priests of TPTB who wish to maintain this control. The most insightful monetary scientist of our time, Antal Fekete, has been marginalized (yes, even by otherwise sound Austrian economists), while Keynesian charlatans get paid to defend the establishment lien (Krugman).
Unemployment is a good thing, a sign of economic progress, the result of higher productivity.
Barring the invention of the Replicator (products) and the Holodeck (services), there will always be demand for more products and services, as the desire of humans to satiate some kind of "unease" is virtually infinite. Unemployment means that there is some factor impeding demand and supply to find each other.
I was a guest at Eastern Telecom's company beach resort in the northern part of country the some 15 years ago. As I waded into the nice surf, I snagged my foot on a cable.
"That's the country's only cable link to the outside world... goes to Hong Kong," explained one of the company guys.
Not because they could make a tiny amount of money from you, but because everything else, legal issues, tax issues, capital investments, required company resources, opportunity cost from not doing something else instead, even lower prices through increased competition, etc.Call that the inconvenience factor.
That's the problem with capitalism. It isn't about trading with the most number of people, it is about maximizing profit.
Actually, it's not that they can make less money from certain markets, but rather they can make more in others thanks to rent-seeking
The effort that a potential foe puts into negating the weapon can be more beneficial than use of the weapon in actual warfare. Nuclear bombs are the classic example.
That M.A.D. example has been deprecated. The new canonical example is "threat of 9/11-style terrorism".
Slashdot Mirror
... a decilakhpati?
I'm for competition and against collusion, but that's supposed to be about the way companies sell products. How is poaching employees supposed to be good for the consumer?
To be a consumer, one needs to be a producer first (credit notwithstanding). Now, if there is a very limited number of buyers for what one produces (oligopsony) then the price you could sell your goods or services would tend to be lower.
Lower input prices (employees) generally lead to lower consumer prices.
In any case, antitrust is a waste of resources since cartels are inherently unstable barring state intervention.
It isn't just Apple that Samsung has a tendency to "draw inspiration" from. (...) So before the usual anti-Apple rhetoric starts a-flyin', keep in mind that Samsung is one of those companies whose business is centered on making commodity knock-offs of popular products. I don't blame Apple for suing to protect Jonathan Ive's design work, because if one of the knock-offs is low quality or problematic, it can end up hurting Apple's brand.
So if say, Apple (ahem) "draws inspiration" from an inferior product and makes it higher quality, then would the "inspirer" not have grounds to sue since it can only enhance its brand?
The more educational choices parents have for their kids the better.
I am a biologist. Ask me questions in my journal. I'll give car/computer analogies if possible!
No need for the invite. This is Slashdot. You had us at "Samantha".
Here we go.
I hold that anonymous allegations, however defamatory, should not be prosecutable. It's anonymous, wouldn't a reasonable person just dismiss any such allegation considering the source?
Got my Nomex suit on, so let's go!
Jobs created don't provide the overall picture of an economic effect. Actual spending does.
The main benefit of the data center is the very existence of the data center, which is of value to many people (to varying degrees).
Professional "economists" would have a much harder time trying to pull the wool over people's eyes if everyone just learned the meanings of and the differences between four simple concepts: production, consumption, spending and saving.
From TFA:"Bizarrely, computer analysis of the data also showed that jokes containing 103 words were thought to be especially funny. The winning "hunters" joke was 102 words long.
[...] He gasps: "My friend is dead! What can I do?" The operator says: "Calm down, I can help. First, let's make sure he's dead." There is a silence, then a gunshot is heard. Back on the phone, the guy says: "OK, so now what?
It's bad because Liberty is an unalienable right, and the government has no business deciding what you should study.
In fact, government has no business deciding if we should study. As it is, providing public education (K-12) and making it mandatory crowds out private education and productive labor.
We are tool-builders, and we created money as a tool to help us. Instead we find economists treating money as a God to which we must sacrifice humans (not them, but other, poorer, humans).
Money (understood as the most widely accepted commodity for trade) was a great invention. States have co-opted the power of this tool through fiat money. Economists do not worship money but are rather the (paid for) high priests of TPTB who wish to maintain this control. The most insightful monetary scientist of our time, Antal Fekete, has been marginalized (yes, even by otherwise sound Austrian economists), while Keynesian charlatans get paid to defend the establishment lien (Krugman).
Unemployment is a good thing, a sign of economic progress, the result of higher productivity.
Barring the invention of the Replicator (products) and the Holodeck (services), there will always be demand for more products and services, as the desire of humans to satiate some kind of "unease" is virtually infinite. Unemployment means that there is some factor impeding demand and supply to find each other.
I was a guest at Eastern Telecom's company beach resort in the northern part of country the some 15 years ago. As I waded into the nice surf, I snagged my foot on a cable.
"That's the country's only cable link to the outside world... goes to Hong Kong," explained one of the company guys.
I hope things are better now.
The committee was like having a deer convince a wolf not to eat him and the wolf trying to convince the deer that it should be eaten.
I think it was more like 12 wolves trying to agree on which deer not to eat.
If you don't want people recording your license plate, maybe you should encrypt it. (:-)
Hah! And they laughed at me when I got vanity plates saying "_nomap"
Not because they could make a tiny amount of money from you, but because everything else, legal issues, tax issues, capital investments, required company resources, opportunity cost from not doing something else instead, even lower prices through increased competition, etc.Call that the inconvenience factor. That's the problem with capitalism. It isn't about trading with the most number of people, it is about maximizing profit.
Actually, it's not that they can make less money from certain markets, but rather they can make more in others thanks to rent-seeking
0.9mg/cm^3 is 0.9kg/m^3, i.e. lighter than air (1.2kg/m^3). I call shenanigans.
The freaking Universe has a density of 9.9x10^-27 kg/m^3
Make of that what you will!
They remember me when they need a ride to and from the airport, but they can't remember to pay me back the money they've borrowed.
"Ante el vicio de pedir, la virtud de no dar."
My English try: "When asking becomes a vice, not giving becomes a virtue."
The effort that a potential foe puts into negating the weapon can be more beneficial than use of the weapon in actual warfare. Nuclear bombs are the classic example.
That M.A.D. example has been deprecated. The new canonical example is "threat of 9/11-style terrorism".
What are the "pros" to pounding yourself in the crotch with a sledgehammer?
Especially coming from someone whose nick is "larry bagina".
If a cop fails to prevent a crime due to neglicence, the city can be sued.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
A pen and some paper. This method is proven to increase later recall of the subject matter. [too lazy to provide citation]
Anecdotal info, but this method worked so well for me (calligraphic pen and nice unlined paper) that I hardly needed to actually read my notes!
Everything should be opt-in. Never opt-out.
I would be fine with opt-out if all it took was appending "_notax" or "_freeman" to my name.
Is it me or is the word "disruptive" the new buzz word?
Well, it was either "disruptive" or "game-changing". Pick your poison.
What else am I missing?
Eva Herzigova
I thought a multi-touch device sitting on your shoulder would be called Polly-Touch!
The US Dollar.