Well, by *that* definition, pretty much no coders are competent.
The NSA assumes they've been hacked. Unless your doctorate thesis focused on cryptography and programming security, you really don't have much chance to get it right by yourself.
Oh come on. Government is so pervasive in the modern world, that you won't find pure private enterprise beyond black markets and below the tax radar transactions.
This is a Very Bad Thing. It will not change until people realize that.
It's also worth noting that arguing that a business is part of government because they have to involve government, is a cliched argument of pro-government advocates.
Charles Koch recently published an article in the Wall Street Journal talking about all of their political donations. He explicitly stated that he hates playing that game, but he doesn't have any choice. It's self-defense. For whatever that's worth.
My claim is that, in the US at least, giant corporations and big government have functionally merged into one entity. And, again, that this is a Very Bad Thing. Corporations have pretty much always been troublesome since their invention, but they didn't get totally out of control until the Supreme Court decided that they're people with rights.
It's very similar to the argument "Government builds your roads so you aren't allowed to criticize government spending!"
I'm not sure how you made that logical leap.
Any real move to a separation of government and the private sector won't change the private landscape that much at first. Any effort to reduce government will have to accept that the big corporations will for the most part survive the transition.
Giant corporations have a vested interest in growing government. As long as they own the politicians, any attempt to reduce it is doomed.
For example, in space launch (an area I keep up with)...
Doesn't everyone on slashdot?:-)
Absolutely none of what you wrote demonstrates a need for corporate personhood. I can kind-of see an LLC in this instance to protect against financial liabilities, though I don't like it. But, when the designers cut corners and wind up with a faulty o-ring that leads to an explosion after they launch a manned flight...I want the person who was responsible for that decision to face some serious consequences.
If the SEC were doing its job, several corporate bankers would be in jail now for fraud, and most of the Wall Street shenanigans there would stop. As it stands, they totally ignore whistle- blowers.
You pointed out that you believe I'm wrong. Pretending you somehow proved it is just another of the many logical fallacies you've committed in this thread.
Maybe you ought to think about what side you really are on. I see the whole corporate personhood fracas as a poorly thought out assault on private enterprise.
I'll point out, again, that you don't seem to be paying attention.
Private enterprise, almost by definition, does not involve government. At this point, it's pretty much impossible to draw a line between giant corporations and the government...they've been in bed together for so long that they've merged at the hip. Pretty much the only "private enterprise" left in Amerika are the little Mom and Pop stores that haven't been swallowed up yet by Wal-Mart and/or government over-regulation (yet).
Government grants people the privilege of creating another fictitious person they can hide behind to escape responsibility for their choices. Where'd the government get the authority to create people out of thin air?
Statements like this are colossally idiotic. Corporate personhood treats corporations in some areas like people, but the law never confuses corporations with people.
Riiiight. The Supreme Court decided that Our Corporate Person Masters (may they live forever!) don't have any limits on their free speech rights when it comes to political campaign contributions. No confusion there at all.
A lot of places have limited liability corporations that act almost the same as the US ones do,
The US isn't "A lot of places."
I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept for you government-worshipers to grasp.
The US was an experiment, intentionally designed to be different from the rest of the world. Because most of the rest of the world is broken. The federal government is here to protect our freedoms. Not to protect a bunch of rich blue-bloods from the consequences of their decisions. Well, that was supposed to be the theory, anyway.
without the fiction of corporate personhood. And their corporations commit the same sort of abuses as US corporations do. For example:
Ah, yes. Good ol' Dutch East Indies. We really should have learned from their monstrous example, realized corporate personhood is one of the single worst ideas ever, and moved back to sanity.
Corporate personhood played no role in the notorious corporations of that era.
The government granted a bunch of special privileges to a collective of rich business owners. Who then proceeded to abuse those privileges in really horrifying ways. This led (directly or not) to a genocide or two. Call it corporate personhood or call it fascism. It was evil then, and it's evil now.
Hard to get much more serious than Deepwater Horizon.
How many people died? Environmental devastation, swept under the rug. There are still worries about species going extinct, and how safe fish from the Gulf are to eat.
BP got a slap on the wrist over it.
The "slap on the wrist" appears to be at least $8 billion dollars just in
According to yahoo finance, BP's gross revenue for the past 3 years was around $890 million. Assuming their accountants are even vaguely honest (dangerous assumption), call that 25 years lost income. So calling it a "slap on the wrist" was an understatement. But thinking it was a real punishment is just blazingly stupid.
direct costs. And the lawsuits really are only starting. BP is already settingt aside money for a $20 billion fund for claims which should be full by the end of 2013. These amounts aren't "slaps" but a significant portion of BP's total stock valuation (which currently is a bit over $140 billion down from a peak just prior to the accident of something like $170-180 billion).
Also, if you were inclined to figure out how many people died in the Deepwater Horizon accident rather than ask pointless rhetorical questions, you could have googled it to see that 11 people died.
"Way back in the beginning" was a little after the Civil War, when some idiot on the Supreme Court (or maybe it was his retarded clerk...accounts differ) decided to overturn 100-ish years of precedents to decide that corporations are people.
The Deep Horizon oil spill is just the most recent obvious issue. The fraud that led to the world-wide economic collapse is another that just might still ring a few bells.
People died. Others are now homeless. Depending on which economists you believe, we're somewhere between a Zombie Apocalypse and Strawberry Fields...but absolutely nobody's going to pound-your-a$$ prison to spend a few years as Bubba's wife to keep it from happening again.
Stupid new/. formatting.
This is basically like a woman who just got raped on the barroom counter pulling up her skirt and saying "Well, that wasn't so bad. Any of you man enough to think you can satisfy me?"
Remember South Africa and Apartheid?
Brought to us by friendly Dutch East India.
And the extinction of an entire people.
But, hey. It made a lot of others rich. So it's all good, right?
Government grants people the privilege of creating another fictitious person they can hide behind to escape responsibility for their choices. Where'd the government get the authority to create people out of thin air?
Despite the 14th Amendment, these imaginary people are, theoretically at least, the slaves of the people who petitioned the government for this privilege.
Corporations are a blight on the free market. Denying them personhood is completely in line with the libertarian point of view.
Ah, yes. Good ol' Dutch East Indies. We really should have learned from their monstrous example, realized corporate personhood is one of the single worst ideas ever, and moved back to sanity.
Hard to get much more serious than Deepwater Horizon.
How many people died? Environmental devastation, swept under the rug. There are still worries about species going extinct, and how safe fish from the Gulf are to eat.
BP got a slap on the wrist over it.
What would be "serious enough"? And what does "liquidated" actually mean in this context?
On the flip side of this, I managed to corner a lawyer when his defenses were down, and actually got a few straight answers out of him.
He's a Liberal Democrat, who openly despises capitalism, money, and corporations in general.
He claimed that the *real* reason corporations are considered "people" is that's the only way the courts can inflict punishment on collective wrong-doing.
Since BP's considered a person, the courts can fine it as a slap on the wrist for the Deepwater Horizon spill.
If it had just been a bunch of people acting as individuals, they'd have never been able to sort out who was responsible for which decision, and which decisions actually caused the mess. The government would have wasted tons more money figuring out who to prosecute, and, in the end, no one would have ended up getting punished.
Take it for what it's worth. Personally, I think this is evidence that "our" system is more completely borked than I ever imagined.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, by *that* definition, pretty much no coders are competent.
The NSA assumes they've been hacked. Unless your doctorate thesis focused on cryptography and programming security, you really don't have much chance to get it right by yourself.
OTOH...unless you're a security expert, an individual hand-rolled solution is just begging to be hacked.
Umm...war on drugs? Police broke the trail.
I still have a little vague hope that people are starting to wake up and smell the coffee. But I suspect that you're absolutely correct.
Exactly
At this point, how do you draw a line between the two? (Government/multi-nationals, that is). :-(
Oh come on. Government is so pervasive in the modern world, that you won't find pure private enterprise beyond black markets and below the tax radar transactions.
This is a Very Bad Thing. It will not change until people realize that.
It's also worth noting that arguing that a business is part of government because they have to involve government, is a cliched argument of pro-government advocates.
Charles Koch recently published an article in the Wall Street Journal talking about all of their political donations. He explicitly stated that he hates playing that game, but he doesn't have any choice. It's self-defense. For whatever that's worth.
My claim is that, in the US at least, giant corporations and big government have functionally merged into one entity. And, again, that this is a Very Bad Thing. Corporations have pretty much always been troublesome since their invention, but they didn't get totally out of control until the Supreme Court decided that they're people with rights.
It's very similar to the argument "Government builds your roads so you aren't allowed to criticize government spending!"
I'm not sure how you made that logical leap.
Any real move to a separation of government and the private sector won't change the private landscape that much at first. Any effort to reduce government will have to accept that the big corporations will for the most part survive the transition.
Giant corporations have a vested interest in growing government. As long as they own the politicians, any attempt to reduce it is doomed.
For example, in space launch (an area I keep up with)...
Doesn't everyone on slashdot? :-)
Absolutely none of what you wrote demonstrates a need for corporate personhood. I can kind-of see an LLC in this instance to protect against financial liabilities, though I don't like it. But, when the designers cut corners and wind up with a faulty o-ring that leads to an explosion after they launch a manned flight...I want the person who was responsible for that decision to face some serious consequences.
If the SEC were doing its job, several corporate bankers would be in jail now for fraud, and most of the Wall Street shenanigans there would stop. As it stands, they totally ignore whistle- blowers.
Yes, this is good.
You pointed out that you believe I'm wrong. Pretending you somehow proved it is just another of the many logical fallacies you've committed in this thread.
Maybe you ought to think about what side you really are on. I see the whole corporate personhood fracas as a poorly thought out assault on private enterprise.
I'll point out, again, that you don't seem to be paying attention.
Private enterprise, almost by definition, does not involve government. At this point, it's pretty much impossible to draw a line between giant corporations and the government...they've been in bed together for so long that they've merged at the hip. Pretty much the only "private enterprise" left in Amerika are the little Mom and Pop stores that haven't been swallowed up yet by Wal-Mart and/or government over-regulation (yet).
I'd say you aren't paying attention.
Ok, rather than continue this pointless one liner garbage, I looked at your history.
It'd be better for you to pull your head out of...the sand and pay attention to the real world, but OK, whatever.
You wrote:
Government grants people the privilege of creating another fictitious person they can hide behind to escape responsibility for their choices. Where'd the government get the authority to create people out of thin air?
Statements like this are colossally idiotic. Corporate personhood treats corporations in some areas like people, but the law never confuses corporations with people.
Riiiight. The Supreme Court decided that Our Corporate Person Masters (may they live forever!) don't have any limits on their free speech rights when it comes to political campaign contributions. No confusion there at all.
A lot of places have limited liability corporations that act almost the same as the US ones do,
The US isn't "A lot of places."
I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept for you government-worshipers to grasp.
The US was an experiment, intentionally designed to be different from the rest of the world. Because most of the rest of the world is broken. The federal government is here to protect our freedoms. Not to protect a bunch of rich blue-bloods from the consequences of their decisions. Well, that was supposed to be the theory, anyway.
without the fiction of corporate personhood. And their corporations commit the same sort of abuses as US corporations do. For example:
Ah, yes. Good ol' Dutch East Indies. We really should have learned from their monstrous example, realized corporate personhood is one of the single worst ideas ever, and moved back to sanity.
Corporate personhood played no role in the notorious corporations of that era.
The government granted a bunch of special privileges to a collective of rich business owners. Who then proceeded to abuse those privileges in really horrifying ways. This led (directly or not) to a genocide or two. Call it corporate personhood or call it fascism. It was evil then, and it's evil now.
Hard to get much more serious than Deepwater Horizon. How many people died? Environmental devastation, swept under the rug. There are still worries about species going extinct, and how safe fish from the Gulf are to eat. BP got a slap on the wrist over it.
The "slap on the wrist" appears to be at least $8 billion dollars just in
According to yahoo finance, BP's gross revenue for the past 3 years was around $890 million. Assuming their accountants are even vaguely honest (dangerous assumption), call that 25 years lost income. So calling it a "slap on the wrist" was an understatement. But thinking it was a real punishment is just blazingly stupid.
direct costs. And the lawsuits really are only starting. BP is already settingt aside money for a $20 billion fund for claims which should be full by the end of 2013. These amounts aren't "slaps" but a significant portion of BP's total stock valuation (which currently is a bit over $140 billion down from a peak just prior to the accident of something like $170-180 billion). Also, if you were inclined to figure out how many people died in the Deepwater Horizon accident rather than ask pointless rhetorical questions, you could have googled it to see that 11 people died.
Those were the direct deaths.
Which were bad
"Way back in the beginning" was a little after the Civil War, when some idiot on the Supreme Court (or maybe it was his retarded clerk...accounts differ) decided to overturn 100-ish years of precedents to decide that corporations are people. The Deep Horizon oil spill is just the most recent obvious issue. The fraud that led to the world-wide economic collapse is another that just might still ring a few bells. People died. Others are now homeless. Depending on which economists you believe, we're somewhere between a Zombie Apocalypse and Strawberry Fields...but absolutely nobody's going to pound-your-a$$ prison to spend a few years as Bubba's wife to keep it from happening again. Stupid new /. formatting.
This is basically like a woman who just got raped on the barroom counter pulling up her skirt and saying "Well, that wasn't so bad. Any of you man enough to think you can satisfy me?"
Remember South Africa and Apartheid? Brought to us by friendly Dutch East India. And the extinction of an entire people. But, hey. It made a lot of others rich. So it's all good, right?
I'd say you aren't paying attention.
The U.S. has been moving steadily back to the feudal system since that decision. Coincidence?
Exactly.
Government grants people the privilege of creating another fictitious person they can hide behind to escape responsibility for their choices. Where'd the government get the authority to create people out of thin air?
Despite the 14th Amendment, these imaginary people are, theoretically at least, the slaves of the people who petitioned the government for this privilege.
Corporations are a blight on the free market. Denying them personhood is completely in line with the libertarian point of view.
Actually, corporate taxes should be abolished because they're just a hidden tax on the corporation's customers.
If we paid those taxes directly, it would give us a better idea of just how badly we're getting screwed, and it would save accounting fees.
"Shutting down the business" is far different than being Bubba's prison wife.
Ah, yes. Good ol' Dutch East Indies. We really should have learned from their monstrous example, realized corporate personhood is one of the single worst ideas ever, and moved back to sanity.
Hard to get much more serious than Deepwater Horizon.
How many people died? Environmental devastation, swept under the rug. There are still worries about species going extinct, and how safe fish from the Gulf are to eat.
BP got a slap on the wrist over it.
What would be "serious enough"? And what does "liquidated" actually mean in this context?
You can't put a corporation in a jail cell to be Bubba's wife.
On the flip side of this, I managed to corner a lawyer when his defenses were down, and actually got a few straight answers out of him.
He's a Liberal Democrat, who openly despises capitalism, money, and corporations in general.
He claimed that the *real* reason corporations are considered "people" is that's the only way the courts can inflict punishment on collective wrong-doing.
Since BP's considered a person, the courts can fine it as a slap on the wrist for the Deepwater Horizon spill.
If it had just been a bunch of people acting as individuals, they'd have never been able to sort out who was responsible for which decision, and which decisions actually caused the mess. The government would have wasted tons more money figuring out who to prosecute, and, in the end, no one would have ended up getting punished.
Take it for what it's worth. Personally, I think this is evidence that "our" system is more completely borked than I ever imagined.
Of course they could be wrong!
My only point here was: are you looking at their credentials?
As I understand it, you just re-stated the problem. Which is why they engineered TCP to work the way it does in the first place
And that's exactly what this is about. That "weirdness [that] can happen under load..."
Why is this only rated a 1?
This may be the best summary of the problem that I've seen yet.