I'm confused why you're attacking me personally. The point I am making is very simple and accurate, no matter how you attempt to change the topic: No private corporation in China does anything without the express blessing of the Chinese government. This is relevant as it pertains to a private company maintaining their censorware, and I have no interest in discussing the Chinese social system with you beyond that, because I don't feel like having people attack me for having a different point of view than them today.
I am making a factual observation, not a value judgement.
It seems people here can't understand the difference between reality and sophism.
The only true examples of Marx's Communism I can think of are certain tribes of Native Americans. And I never said the US has true capitalism, nor that China is true Communism.
People here jump at the opportunity to tell someone how simplified their argument is, instead of actually considering the content of the argument itself. I guess that's common among all us nerds though.
Bing is seriously a backronym for "Bing is not google"? Wow. Here I thought it was just one of the cheapest 4 letter domains they could buy... then they went and decided to "GNU" their name...
I'm not going to debate the merits of Communism here... that's a recipie for disaster. Suffice to say that I am limitting myself to actual circumstances as they exist and affect the topics which we are discussing.
No, I was just trying to collect some +1 Funny karma.;)
All that aside, pretending the Chinese could NEVER produce a quality product is silly. Pretending they can do it now is equally silly.
Quality is EXPENSIVE, and the Chinese are not building wealth in their country very effectively... you need that to improve some of the finer points on a large scale.
You understand what communism in any form is, right?
The state controls commerce and corporations.
Xinhua is a "private" news company... owned by the Chinese government. Its ingenious really, because "public" implies some sort of transparency. The Chinese government is very fond of the federal government privately owning corporations... you have the same level of control and no specter of transparency or oversight.
For instance: in the television series Babylon 5, the Shadow race became an incredibly advanced race through repeated chaos and trial. Because of this, they dealt with all the minor races by attempting to instill chaos and trials so that the truly strong races could become stronger, and the weaker races were eliminated.
It was an ideological belief that chaos and destruction were the best ways to foster improvement, and they destroyed races out of an ideological, but in their minds benevolent want to improve the less advanced species around them.
What about a domain for a name... say... JordanLeDoux.com...
Because of a dispute with my registrar, they let the domain lapse and it was immediately snatched by a "domainer". There are no more than six "Jordan LeDoux"s in the United States that I've found... the utility of such a site is very low. What would the approzimate price on such a domain be?
There is effort, a physical scaricity and uniqueness in all of those things. In domains, the scarcity, the creation and the economic value are all artificial until it performs work, which it is not doing when it is being squatted.
In a very real sense, domain squatting is a very negative economic investment for everyone except the squatter. When you hoard a resource, that resource does not lose any of its value or utility, but with an artificial resource like a domain (which unlike oil or diamonds cannot be replaced by an identical substitute) and work not being performed by that resource is eternally lost. It can never be regained, and the resource is constantly losing productive value by being squatted. (Theoretically, this lost value is summed into the cost of the domain purchase from the squatter, though I would argue that almost always the productivity lost is orders of magnitude higher than the price paid to the squatter.)
In this view, cybersquatting is the practice of stealing productivity from the economy by creating a false absence of resources, then compounding that productivity into a payment which you collect as a return on your investment. For a social economics standpoint, cybersquatters are best described as theives.
This just theoretically reduces the alleles available to given sample... it isn't genetic evolution, which I think is the point being made.
And it's a fairly valid point. There is a big difference between differentiation and evolution, and the blurred line between them by many "science buffs" is why they're scoffed at by ID proponents.
That idea might take a Constitutional Amendment to enact however... although since it deal with only the internal rules of conduct in Congress it could probably get by on just a bill.
game addiction isn't like other addictions, and it often doesn't take the same bottoming-out to get things under control. Most game addicts (I don't want to mince words: on the short to medium term, it is practically indistinguishable from addiction - pedantry about it is unhelpful) seem to stop playing addictively when they start building social skills and active lives, which of course creates a positive feedback loop.
Have you ever known an addict? Games addiction requires just as much bottoming out and is just as devastating. And the things that bring people back from it are actually the same things that correct many drug addicts.
There is lots of humor in society about the stupidity of the average Joe. Remember that, by definition, half of everybody is even dumber than that. Sad, when you think about it, huh?
Wouldn't that be the stupidity of the median Joe?
Just sayin'.
Re:Well, so....how long will they shut down?
on
Duke Nukem For Never
·
· Score: 1
It took me like 30 seconds to figure out what SCNR stood for...
A publisher takes words that someone wants to print, and recreates them in a distributable format.
What happens in your perfectly black and white world if Joomla is used by Al-Qaeda to plot an attack?
They took money to do their fucking job.
Because I disagree with a premise, yet not the conclusion, I'm either a troll, shill or moron. Slashdot at its finest. Sounds like a faith based argument to me.
if physicians would not lend their names or pens to these efforts, and publishers would not offer their presses, these publications could not exist.
Why is it the publishers job to censor or police what people publish?
I can understand why it would be a professional consideration for physicians to not assist something like this, but going after the publisher morally is crazy. Let's not start witch hunting now.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I don't agree with that.
;)
(Is praying for the +1 Funny mods.... )
I'm confused why you're attacking me personally. The point I am making is very simple and accurate, no matter how you attempt to change the topic: No private corporation in China does anything without the express blessing of the Chinese government. This is relevant as it pertains to a private company maintaining their censorware, and I have no interest in discussing the Chinese social system with you beyond that, because I don't feel like having people attack me for having a different point of view than them today.
I am making a factual observation, not a value judgement.
It seems people here can't understand the difference between reality and sophism.
The only true examples of Marx's Communism I can think of are certain tribes of Native Americans. And I never said the US has true capitalism, nor that China is true Communism.
People here jump at the opportunity to tell someone how simplified their argument is, instead of actually considering the content of the argument itself. I guess that's common among all us nerds though.
Bing is seriously a backronym for "Bing is not google"? Wow. Here I thought it was just one of the cheapest 4 letter domains they could buy... then they went and decided to "GNU" their name...
I'm not going to debate the merits of Communism here... that's a recipie for disaster. Suffice to say that I am limitting myself to actual circumstances as they exist and affect the topics which we are discussing.
No, I was just trying to collect some +1 Funny karma. ;)
All that aside, pretending the Chinese could NEVER produce a quality product is silly. Pretending they can do it now is equally silly.
Quality is EXPENSIVE, and the Chinese are not building wealth in their country very effectively... you need that to improve some of the finer points on a large scale.
You understand what communism in any form is, right?
The state controls commerce and corporations.
Xinhua is a "private" news company... owned by the Chinese government. Its ingenious really, because "public" implies some sort of transparency. The Chinese government is very fond of the federal government privately owning corporations... you have the same level of control and no specter of transparency or oversight.
For instance: in the television series Babylon 5, the Shadow race became an incredibly advanced race through repeated chaos and trial. Because of this, they dealt with all the minor races by attempting to instill chaos and trials so that the truly strong races could become stronger, and the weaker races were eliminated.
It was an ideological belief that chaos and destruction were the best ways to foster improvement, and they destroyed races out of an ideological, but in their minds benevolent want to improve the less advanced species around them.
That's awfully unique grammatical syntax for someone who grew up in the States.
I have a question...
What about a domain for a name... say... JordanLeDoux.com...
Because of a dispute with my registrar, they let the domain lapse and it was immediately snatched by a "domainer". There are no more than six "Jordan LeDoux"s in the United States that I've found... the utility of such a site is very low. What would the approzimate price on such a domain be?
1. What motivation does the IANA have to change things?
2. I don't have a concrete recommendation to fix things. That doesn't prevent me from seeing the shortcomings of our current situation though.
There is effort, a physical scaricity and uniqueness in all of those things. In domains, the scarcity, the creation and the economic value are all artificial until it performs work, which it is not doing when it is being squatted.
In a very real sense, domain squatting is a very negative economic investment for everyone except the squatter. When you hoard a resource, that resource does not lose any of its value or utility, but with an artificial resource like a domain (which unlike oil or diamonds cannot be replaced by an identical substitute) and work not being performed by that resource is eternally lost. It can never be regained, and the resource is constantly losing productive value by being squatted. (Theoretically, this lost value is summed into the cost of the domain purchase from the squatter, though I would argue that almost always the productivity lost is orders of magnitude higher than the price paid to the squatter.)
In this view, cybersquatting is the practice of stealing productivity from the economy by creating a false absence of resources, then compounding that productivity into a payment which you collect as a return on your investment. For a social economics standpoint, cybersquatters are best described as theives.
This just theoretically reduces the alleles available to given sample... it isn't genetic evolution, which I think is the point being made.
And it's a fairly valid point. There is a big difference between differentiation and evolution, and the blurred line between them by many "science buffs" is why they're scoffed at by ID proponents.
I posted an actual, serious idea:
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/5316-4049
That idea might take a Constitutional Amendment to enact however... although since it deal with only the internal rules of conduct in Congress it could probably get by on just a bill.
Have you ever known an addict? Games addiction requires just as much bottoming out and is just as devastating. And the things that bring people back from it are actually the same things that correct many drug addicts.
So we know that okcupid link is safe... that chick is way too hot to post on Slashdot (and that's a very low bar...)
I think the worst case scenario is somewhere around here
Can't you magneticly suspend it?
(Is not very familiar with Deuterium.)
Wouldn't that be the stupidity of the median Joe?
Just sayin'.
It took me like 30 seconds to figure out what SCNR stood for...
Your stick would swirl outward from your location in a spiral shape and the motion propogated down the stick.
A publisher takes words that someone wants to print, and recreates them in a distributable format.
What happens in your perfectly black and white world if Joomla is used by Al-Qaeda to plot an attack?
They took money to do their fucking job.
Because I disagree with a premise, yet not the conclusion, I'm either a troll, shill or moron. Slashdot at its finest. Sounds like a faith based argument to me.
Why is it the publishers job to censor or police what people publish?
I can understand why it would be a professional consideration for physicians to not assist something like this, but going after the publisher morally is crazy. Let's not start witch hunting now.
Was that a real question, or did you forget who the Democrats elected to run against him?
I'm confused... we're running a story on what amounts to a comment on a previous story...