Undeniable? I think not. Actually what usually happens is that one company tries to differentiate their product. Competition drives prices down and quality up, and increases diversity. Monopolies are highly visible, and probably it's this mindshare that makes you think it's the norm, but of thousands of businesses over centuries, few became monopolies. In fact, many businesses realize that having at least one competitor can improve profit for all... check out coopetition. It can create a bigger market sooner than one company could achieve alone. Your claim is utterly absurd.
But even talking in terms of democrats vs republicans is a problem. It makes people choose one or the other, based on their various differences. Once people have chosen they tend to side with their choice on most issues, if not all. They're distracted by these issues which aren't the most pressing issues that the country faces. The important issues are agreed by Rs and Ds in government. Expansion of executive power. Lobbying. Erosion of the constitution. Big defense. Militarization of the police force. Reduction of state power. Monitoring citizens, esp. dissenters. Deficit spending. Foreign policy. It is, without a doubt, the largest most successful sleight of hand ever achieved. And no end is in sight. A vote for R or D is a vote for the machine. The Party. More of the same (MOTS - I feel a meme coming on). Bush (MOTS) Clinton (MOTS) Romney (MOTS)
It's possible that Ron Paul isn't - or maybe he's just better at the sophistry...
I accept that some markets will turn into monopolies. I read gp to be implying that all markets will converge on monopoly. I don't agree. And given the existance of long running markets with ongoing healthy competition, I'd say there is plenty of evidence. As for praising free markets and efficiency, what's your proposed alternative?
Jeez. Quit with the partisan bullshit. When was the last time a Republican shrunk government? Bush G? GW? Even the deified Regan created an enormous military industrial machine, that dwarfs all other. The democrat party is no better.
Don't get me wrong. Non politicians who describe themselves as democrats or republicans that I've met are fine people, and generally love their country and want the constitution upheld. I have no beef with most of them.
Elephants and asses have more in common with each other than they have with us.
I only read the first few lines of that because it became immediately clear that you know nothing about any of it. 1. The exchanges will ONLY match at the NBBO. Therefore you can only short at the national best offer. 2. A large aggressive sell will cause a decline in the market... hence you actually have to keep selling at lower prices. 3. After a reasonably short drop in price, a mandatory halt goes into effect... see circuit breakers. This is built into exchange matching engines to prevent flash crashes.
Even if a bunch of stocks were to plummet, the executions would be busted and the stocks would recover. This has happened... generally it due to rulings of "clearly erroneous" trades.
That isn't true: e.g. iirc SOPA was fought successfully with a large representative mailing campaign. And even if there is only a slight chance, you should take it. Do everything you can.
They found bunches of servers online, by themselves. And you don't need to set up a server to play with others. They do direct connect when they aren't connecting to servers.
You're not wrong for criticizing, you're wrong for criticizing on everyone else's behalf.
"I think the real question is "how are people actually playing the game" I'm seeing signs that the majority of non-hardcore players are simply using creative or playing on peaceful." Why do you care how anyone else plays the game?
"Because some nerds are using "oh minecraft is so popular and it's because it's so nerdy and has redstone circuitry etc etc"...when it's not." Don't know where you got this from. Plenty of people play, of all ages. Nerdy and not nerdy. Peaceful/survival/creative. Still don't know why you're trying to be a spokesperson for everyone else.
"But Notch and Mojang get a pass because they're "indie". I'm sorry, but I think Indie devs should be held to the same standards Square-Enix, Bethesda, Bioware, Blizzard, etc etc are." This is nonsense: my kids don't even know what indie means.
"Sure, lots of people are playing it... but they're not playing it the way the hardcore say they should be or doing what the hardcore says they should be doing." Who are you to say what other people *should* be doing?
"It may be fun, but I don't think hardcore nerds should go around promoting it as the be-all and end-all of great games that everyone should play. It's not finished and it needs a LOT more work, and I don't think Mojang should be charging what they do for it. 10 bucks, maybe." Again with telling others what they should be doing. And you think it's priced wrong. Don't buy it, or ask for your money back.
Quit telling us we should be doing this or that or we paid too much for an unfinished game.
I don't follow this ""I stated "part != whole" and gave examples of how your "identical" statement is false."" HFCS is fructose + glucose + other. I claim that both fructose and glucose are found in foods naturally in exactly the same form, and are processed by the body in the same way regardless of whether they came from HFCS or other sources. This is my sole claim in this chain. If you agree with this then we have no further argument.
I *NEVER* stated "... part == whole _and_ processing makes no difference."
Moderation, at least on slashdot, is not intended to find truth. It's intended to promote discussion and hide trolls and abuse. Moderators are supposed to up mod posts when they are on topic and interesting - there is no "-1 disagree" mod here.
I think this system would be best, if the moderators actually followed the rules.
I completely agree. I would have voted Obama based on his campaign... now I'm incredibly disappointed. In fact, I almost believe he's been forced to change... almost... Was he always disingenuous?
That's not the "result of ageneral political consensus among the President and Congress that allowing terrorists to kill large numbers of American citizens is a bad thing." It was a huge power grab and has done nothing to improve American safety. It *has* significantly eroded our constitution. And yes, some of us question the gross increase in executive power and public surveillance in return for an undemonstrated and unrealized threat. If any significant plot had been prevented we could have a public debate on the merits, but no such plot has ever been brought to the table. We're supposed to just trust them, and with the current administration and prior adminstrations' track records! They can go fuck themselves.
I merely claim that fructose is processed the same regardles of whether it comes from hfcs or from, for example, natural agave.
If you actually read what I wrote you'll see that I absolutely agree that cooking and various kinds of processing change the chemical composition of the foods, and therefore necessarily changes the way they are matabolized.
Same with cooking: 1. It changes the molecular structure of proteins. 2. Changes sugars in various ways 3. Often leaches out chemicals, leaving fewer nutrients
You're making my point for me: Pink goo is bad precisely because: 1. They add chemicals to it to kill bacteria 2. If they didn't, the bacteria would make the food inedible.
I.e. they're not the same chemicals as are in beef.
You missed the whole point to rant on about the imprecision of the term organic.
Take modern supermarket foods. The fresh fruits and veggies are high in vitamins and fiber. Now look at canned fruits and veggies, frozen foods etc... low to no fiber vastly reduced vitamins and other nutrients. Look at canned sweet corn: low nutrients, low fibre, and added sugar.
Slashdot Mirror
Undeniable?
I think not.
Actually what usually happens is that one company tries to differentiate their product. Competition drives prices down and quality up, and increases diversity.
Monopolies are highly visible, and probably it's this mindshare that makes you think it's the norm, but of thousands of businesses over centuries, few became monopolies.
In fact, many businesses realize that having at least one competitor can improve profit for all... check out coopetition. It can create a bigger market sooner than one company could achieve alone.
Your claim is utterly absurd.
But even talking in terms of democrats vs republicans is a problem. It makes people choose one or the other, based on their various differences. Once people have chosen they tend to side with their choice on most issues, if not all. They're distracted by these issues which aren't the most pressing issues that the country faces.
The important issues are agreed by Rs and Ds in government. Expansion of executive power. Lobbying. Erosion of the constitution. Big defense. Militarization of the police force. Reduction of state power. Monitoring citizens, esp. dissenters. Deficit spending. Foreign policy.
It is, without a doubt, the largest most successful sleight of hand ever achieved. And no end is in sight.
A vote for R or D is a vote for the machine. The Party. More of the same (MOTS - I feel a meme coming on).
Bush (MOTS)
Clinton (MOTS)
Romney (MOTS)
It's possible that Ron Paul isn't - or maybe he's just better at the sophistry...
Don't vote MOTS!
I accept that some markets will turn into monopolies. I read gp to be implying that all markets will converge on monopoly. I don't agree. And given the existance of long running markets with ongoing healthy competition, I'd say there is plenty of evidence.
As for praising free markets and efficiency, what's your proposed alternative?
Cars.
Bread.
Restaurants.
Banks.
Silverware.
Insurance.
Amusement parks.
Air travel.
Optics.
Mobile phones, service and hardware.
I can go on and on. Almost all of the things I think of I know of multiple companies servicing that market.
Your turn.
Most markets don't turn into monopolies. There's nothing natural about them, and they're highly inefficient.
Jeez. Quit with the partisan bullshit. When was the last time a Republican shrunk government?
Bush G? GW? Even the deified Regan created an enormous military industrial machine, that dwarfs all other.
The democrat party is no better.
Don't get me wrong. Non politicians who describe themselves as democrats or republicans that I've met are fine people, and generally love their country and want the constitution upheld. I have no beef with most of them.
Elephants and asses have more in common with each other than they have with us.
I only read the first few lines of that because it became immediately clear that you know nothing about any of it.
1. The exchanges will ONLY match at the NBBO. Therefore you can only short at the national best offer.
2. A large aggressive sell will cause a decline in the market... hence you actually have to keep selling at lower prices.
3. After a reasonably short drop in price, a mandatory halt goes into effect... see circuit breakers. This is built into exchange matching engines to prevent flash crashes.
Even if a bunch of stocks were to plummet, the executions would be busted and the stocks would recover. This has happened... generally it due to rulings of "clearly erroneous" trades.
That isn't true: e.g. iirc SOPA was fought successfully with a large representative mailing campaign.
And even if there is only a slight chance, you should take it. Do everything you can.
They found bunches of servers online, by themselves.
And you don't need to set up a server to play with others. They do direct connect when they aren't connecting to servers.
You're not wrong for criticizing, you're wrong for criticizing on everyone else's behalf.
"I think the real question is "how are people actually playing the game" I'm seeing signs that the majority of non-hardcore players are simply using creative or playing on peaceful."
Why do you care how anyone else plays the game?
"Because some nerds are using "oh minecraft is so popular and it's because it's so nerdy and has redstone circuitry etc etc"...when it's not."
Don't know where you got this from. Plenty of people play, of all ages. Nerdy and not nerdy. Peaceful/survival/creative. Still don't know why you're trying to be a spokesperson for everyone else.
"But Notch and Mojang get a pass because they're "indie". I'm sorry, but I think Indie devs should be held to the same standards Square-Enix, Bethesda, Bioware, Blizzard, etc etc are."
This is nonsense: my kids don't even know what indie means.
"Sure, lots of people are playing it... but they're not playing it the way the hardcore say they should be or doing what the hardcore says they should be doing."
Who are you to say what other people *should* be doing?
"It may be fun, but I don't think hardcore nerds should go around promoting it as the be-all and end-all of great games that everyone should play. It's not finished and it needs a LOT more work, and I don't think Mojang should be charging what they do for it. 10 bucks, maybe."
Again with telling others what they should be doing. And you think it's priced wrong. Don't buy it, or ask for your money back.
Quit telling us we should be doing this or that or we paid too much for an unfinished game.
I don't follow this ""I stated "part != whole" and gave examples of how your "identical" statement is false.""
HFCS is fructose + glucose + other. I claim that both fructose and glucose are found in foods naturally in exactly the same form, and are processed by the body in the same way regardless of whether they came from HFCS or other sources. This is my sole claim in this chain. If you agree with this then we have no further argument.
I *NEVER* stated "... part == whole _and_ processing makes no difference."
I don't, and have never, believed those things.
There's plenty of evidence that many in that party were merely going after the Christian vote, and don't actually believe much of their rhetoric.
We need to stick together - we have much more in common with each other than with those fucking lizards.
Moderation, at least on slashdot, is not intended to find truth.
It's intended to promote discussion and hide trolls and abuse.
Moderators are supposed to up mod posts when they are on topic and interesting - there is no "-1 disagree" mod here.
I think this system would be best, if the moderators actually followed the rules.
I completely agree.
I would have voted Obama based on his campaign... now I'm incredibly disappointed. In fact, I almost believe he's been forced to change... almost...
Was he always disingenuous?
That's not the "result of ageneral political consensus among the President and Congress that allowing terrorists to kill large numbers of American citizens is a bad thing."
It was a huge power grab and has done nothing to improve American safety.
It *has* significantly eroded our constitution.
And yes, some of us question the gross increase in executive power and public surveillance in return for an undemonstrated and unrealized threat.
If any significant plot had been prevented we could have a public debate on the merits, but no such plot has ever been brought to the table. We're supposed to just trust them, and with the current administration and prior adminstrations' track records!
They can go fuck themselves.
We need something like groklaw to collect all this stuff in one place...
Groklaw would have been my first choice... but it's gone.
It depressing how right you are.
Shame you did it anonymously.
When was the last time a president followed through on his campaign promises?
Exactly. People that blame D or R are just continuing the fiction that there is any significant difference.
I merely claim that fructose is processed the same regardles of whether it comes from hfcs or from, for example, natural agave.
If you actually read what I wrote you'll see that I absolutely agree that cooking and various kinds of processing change the chemical composition of the foods, and therefore necessarily changes the way they are matabolized.
That has no bearing on what I said.
I made no statement about GMO, neither for nor against.
Same with cooking:
1. It changes the molecular structure of proteins.
2. Changes sugars in various ways
3. Often leaches out chemicals, leaving fewer nutrients
So yeah, again, different chemicals.
You're making my point for me:
Pink goo is bad precisely because:
1. They add chemicals to it to kill bacteria
2. If they didn't, the bacteria would make the food inedible.
I.e. they're not the same chemicals as are in beef.
You missed the whole point to rant on about the imprecision of the term organic.
Take modern supermarket foods. The fresh fruits and veggies are high in vitamins and fiber. Now look at canned fruits and veggies, frozen foods etc... low to no fiber vastly reduced vitamins and other nutrients.
Look at canned sweet corn: low nutrients, low fibre, and added sugar.
His underlying point was correct.
Fructose from other sources does the same thing. Less so when combined with fibre, apparently.