You capitalist religionist types seem to forget that...
That is quite a leap. I don't remember mentioning religion. Perhaps it was in a gp I skipped over.
But anyway, we DO learn. I remember when some people got REALLY sick in a Jack-in-the-box somewhere in Salt Lake City. This was like 12 years or so. I still remember it, and was leery of them for about 2 years, and still don't go there as often as I go to Wendy's. If the only choices between fast food were nasty crap for 50 cents and stuff that will not make you sick for 60 cents, people would pay the extra 10 cents. People do care if what they want to eat will kill them. It seems to me that if one of these gargantuan companies of which you speak would clean up their act and produce a cleaner product for a little bit more, they would make a tidy profit. Another thing that occurs to me is the idea that having meat that doesn't contain insect body parts is somewhat of a luxury, not a right. I guess one thing we need to ask ourselves is whether or not we have the right to force others to pay to make sure we have food of as high quality as that eaten by the rich.
About "Real Choice." We DO have real choice. You make the illusion that the only choices we have are the ones that are palatable, the ones most people make, or that we are used to. I can go make my own refreshing beverage, it will just suck, though it will be a lot cheaper. I don't need to wait for meat to be on sale for $1.89/lb. I can go out and slaughter my own in the back yard. I have that choice today, and I could save money doing it. Why don't I? Partly because I'm trained not to, partly because I love my pets, partly because I prefer beef, and partly because I like sanitary meat and am willing and able to pay for that luxury.
When I learn of people who don't have the ability to pay for that luxury, I donate what food or money I can. I DO know personally people who can afford to buy better food than they do, but instead choose to spend it on bigger TVs or more channels. So what are we really subsidizing? Better food or higher pride?
You mentioned Silent Spring, check up on that. From what I understand, that book was of dubious accuracy (though I admit I have not read it). Anyway, we have come a long way since then, haven't we? Food has been getting steadily more and more sanitary for a long, long time now.
but perhaps they are trying to increase responsibility and accountability. Perhaps if that guy had been able to find out who had libeled him, he would never have been libeled, or at least they would have fired him or sued him or whatever.
If I thought that there was a 1 in 10,000 chance of me getting sick from McDonald's, you'd better believe I'd never eat there.
The evidence of this is that I very rarely do.
You seem to make the assumption that people are too dumb to make good decisions. That's not necessarily true. Once people realize that a 33cent hamburger can get them a $2,000 medical bill, they will realize their money is better spent elsewhere.
It's like helmet laws. Helmet laws have never saved one life. People wearing helmets are what save lives. My wife made me go out and get a helmet before I went mountain biking. Of course, the first time she wasn't looking I went out for a ride without it. After scratching the heck out of my face, I learned to wear a helmet.
People learn. If I get sick eating burgers, I will learn to stop. If I find insect meat in my hot dogs, I will stop buying it.
My car has that paint! It's activated by salt on the winter roads and other things. I've had to wait a long time for the colors to change, but there is a sort of reddish-brown highlight effect behind the tires, at the tip of the hood, and above the windsheild, surrounded by a drab gray halo, then the silver-gray regular color of the car. It looks pretty amazing!
Think of it this way:
Internet ads are cheaper than TV ads, and the quality doesn't have to be as high.
Think of it this way: If I see a TV commercial, it had better be good, because no matter how excited about it I am, it's going to be a while before I have a chance to spend money on the product. If an Internet ad sparks my interest, I can be spending money on their website in a matter of seconds.
MicroSoft is not stupid, and they will do what they have to do. So the only way to make them do what we want them to do is to make it so they have to do it. They are making these overtures of openness to try to keep big customers, like the city of Boston, right? Well, if Boston doesn't like this 'open' plan, they can do something else (and should!).
People (by people I mean most people) take what they are used to taking. If we can get enought people to be ticked off at this and use another format, we can force MicroSoft to do things the way we want them done. If we hold them to our demands, either they will get our money, or they will seal their own doom in the word processing market.
If the government should take more upon itself by fixing levees, etc., would that make the public reliance on government increase, thus demanding they take care of other problems?
I don't know if the government should take care of levees or not. That's not what I'm arguing here, I am trying to explore whether or not this sort of thing begets more of the same.
Where will it end? Has Canadian moderate socialism reached its goal, or will it keep going on?
I found your thoughts on communism interesting, especially the parts about how Lenin had to reintroduce currency, etc. to keep his people alive. I think of the 'great strides' China is taking towards free enterprise (leaving Hong Kong as-is, opening up more and more to Western industry). That, taken with insight into the history of the USSR under Lenin, Virginia, etc. make me think that the ONLY things communism is good for (and it is REALLY good at this) are increasing government control and reducing human free agency.
Think about it: communism doesn't work, it never did. History has shown time and time again that it doesn't work. Nobody is happier. The one system that has brought the most prosperity to the greatest number of people is the American capitalist system. Both for production and protection (see WWII).
So if capitalism is shown to work and communism is shown not to work, what can be the only object of communism? Reducing YOUR freedom, because that is the ONLY think that it has shown it can do effectively.
So, back to China, it is giving up the parts of communism that don't work (the economy part) and keeping the parts that DO work (destroying human freedom). So is China to be congratulated on its great strides towards freedom? I don't know.
Anyway, I guess the similarities between socialism and communism (the synonymity of their names, their end goal of more and more government control, etc.) make me think that the only REAL difference between communism and socialism is patience. They will both end up in the same place in the end, no?
In the odd chance that someone actually reads this 4th-level post, if you can point out another real difference between socialism and communism, I would seriously like to hear it.
Actually, it is my firm belief that you CAN trust a successful company to do things that are in their best interests. Clearly, they seem to think that customer ignorance is good for business. Why would they think that? Perhaps we have trained them to think that.
The real lessons here are:
Be proactive.
Watch out for yourself.
The only way to get a corporation to look out for your best interests is to convince it (remind it?) that your interests are their interests (happy customers!).
Make your interests clear by voting with your wallet. Is there a company out there that tries to fix security holes before the customer knows about them? If so, buy your products from them.
As I wrote that last bit, it occurred to me: perhaps leaving the security-hole-finding business up to the customer base is good business sense because it works and is cheaper than hiring your own security-hole-finders. I guess that brings us back to the proactive list.
"Here, Halliburton, I give you this no-bid contract. Damn pity we have a war & all, but the intelligence, to Mr. Cheney's great chagrin, says without doubt* that Iraq is quickly amassing nucular [sic] capabilities, & with Al Qaida & 9-11 & all, we have no choice. P.S. You might want to hold on to those shares. I'm buyin' some myself!!"
This makes no sense, as the no-bid contract was awarded before Bush was elected, and before the war on terror began.
As a teacher, I would like to get rid of all federal involvement in public education. I would be willing to lose all federal funding in exchange for the freedom to have my state and district (and thus our local people) design and implement an education plan that works for us.
I strongly feel that I have a better feel for the needs of my students than any of my elected representatives do.
I think that the war started out for that reason, but ended up being about slavery. Compare statements by Lincoln at the beginning of the Civil War to the Gettysburg Address. Why? Because (and this is my opinion, which I am still developing) the American people might go to war for economic reasons, but they will only stay at war for moral reasons. 'Economic' and 'moral' are probably not the best words to use there, but I think you get the idea.
I compare this to the war in Iraq. The reason we are still there is to liberate Iraq (insert knee-jerk, hugely off-topic ranting and raving here, on both sides of the issue). I don't think Americans have the stomach to wage war for money, just for right or wrong.
This was not intended to start a discussion on the morality of a war against Iraq, or indeed any war, just to examine motivations for war, and how far they can carry us.
The simple solution is to vote for candidates who are fiscally responsible (I did, even though it meant crossing the party line).
The problem with that is that there are usually only 2 reasonable candidates for whom to vote once November comes around. Neither of them probably is fically responsible. So the next step is to get involved at the local level, at the part caucus in your community.
The next thing is to get involved in local politics, like mayor, county commission, etc. Big-time politicians have to start out somewhere, no?
Our elected representatives are STILL accountable to us, even though it seems clear that they have forgotten it, and are trying to help us forget it.
We CAN escape the debt, but it will take some serious work and belt-tightening on our part. Is it any wonder the government is in inescapable debt? The citizenry is in inescapable debt. Look up figures on the indebtedness of the citizens of the US. It's frightening.
Sadly, the US government is a reflection of its constituency.
If the software was run in the situation where you were in the room, then the software would be run in the situation when you played it back. It just doesn't stop because "oh, that's a tape player"...
Why would the software be there during playback? The context is completely different, and I think it's clear that context seriously affects our perception.
Finally Microsoft will have to sell products based on the quality of the software instead of the customer being railroaded into keeping the ability to read their files in the future.
I think Office is a fine product, but I always felt a little cheated that I couldn't read newer files on my older version.
Of course they were on drugs. That's why 2001 made it!
Actually, I'm only half joking. I have it on good authority that 2001 is MUCH more enjoyable and less boring if you are hopped up while watching it. I don't remember what kind of drugs the guy said were best.
Disclaimer: I actually enjoyed 2001, and I have never done drugs.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, your link is dead. Or appears to me to be dead.
That is quite a leap. I don't remember mentioning religion. Perhaps it was in a gp I skipped over.
But anyway, we DO learn. I remember when some people got REALLY sick in a Jack-in-the-box somewhere in Salt Lake City. This was like 12 years or so. I still remember it, and was leery of them for about 2 years, and still don't go there as often as I go to Wendy's. If the only choices between fast food were nasty crap for 50 cents and stuff that will not make you sick for 60 cents, people would pay the extra 10 cents. People do care if what they want to eat will kill them. It seems to me that if one of these gargantuan companies of which you speak would clean up their act and produce a cleaner product for a little bit more, they would make a tidy profit. Another thing that occurs to me is the idea that having meat that doesn't contain insect body parts is somewhat of a luxury, not a right. I guess one thing we need to ask ourselves is whether or not we have the right to force others to pay to make sure we have food of as high quality as that eaten by the rich.
About "Real Choice." We DO have real choice. You make the illusion that the only choices we have are the ones that are palatable, the ones most people make, or that we are used to. I can go make my own refreshing beverage, it will just suck, though it will be a lot cheaper. I don't need to wait for meat to be on sale for $1.89/lb. I can go out and slaughter my own in the back yard. I have that choice today, and I could save money doing it. Why don't I? Partly because I'm trained not to, partly because I love my pets, partly because I prefer beef, and partly because I like sanitary meat and am willing and able to pay for that luxury.
When I learn of people who don't have the ability to pay for that luxury, I donate what food or money I can. I DO know personally people who can afford to buy better food than they do, but instead choose to spend it on bigger TVs or more channels. So what are we really subsidizing? Better food or higher pride?
You mentioned Silent Spring, check up on that. From what I understand, that book was of dubious accuracy (though I admit I have not read it). Anyway, we have come a long way since then, haven't we? Food has been getting steadily more and more sanitary for a long, long time now.
but perhaps they are trying to increase responsibility and accountability. Perhaps if that guy had been able to find out who had libeled him, he would never have been libeled, or at least they would have fired him or sued him or whatever.
The evidence of this is that I very rarely do.
You seem to make the assumption that people are too dumb to make good decisions. That's not necessarily true. Once people realize that a 33cent hamburger can get them a $2,000 medical bill, they will realize their money is better spent elsewhere.
It's like helmet laws. Helmet laws have never saved one life. People wearing helmets are what save lives. My wife made me go out and get a helmet before I went mountain biking. Of course, the first time she wasn't looking I went out for a ride without it. After scratching the heck out of my face, I learned to wear a helmet.
People learn. If I get sick eating burgers, I will learn to stop. If I find insect meat in my hot dogs, I will stop buying it.
My car has that paint! It's activated by salt on the winter roads and other things. I've had to wait a long time for the colors to change, but there is a sort of reddish-brown highlight effect behind the tires, at the tip of the hood, and above the windsheild, surrounded by a drab gray halo, then the silver-gray regular color of the car. It looks pretty amazing!
Internet ads are cheaper than TV ads, and the quality doesn't have to be as high.
Think of it this way: If I see a TV commercial, it had better be good, because no matter how excited about it I am, it's going to be a while before I have a chance to spend money on the product. If an Internet ad sparks my interest, I can be spending money on their website in a matter of seconds.
People (by people I mean most people) take what they are used to taking. If we can get enought people to be ticked off at this and use another format, we can force MicroSoft to do things the way we want them done. If we hold them to our demands, either they will get our money, or they will seal their own doom in the word processing market.
If the government should take more upon itself by fixing levees, etc., would that make the public reliance on government increase, thus demanding they take care of other problems?
I don't know if the government should take care of levees or not. That's not what I'm arguing here, I am trying to explore whether or not this sort of thing begets more of the same.
Where will it end? Has Canadian moderate socialism reached its goal, or will it keep going on?
Think about it: communism doesn't work, it never did. History has shown time and time again that it doesn't work. Nobody is happier. The one system that has brought the most prosperity to the greatest number of people is the American capitalist system. Both for production and protection (see WWII).
So if capitalism is shown to work and communism is shown not to work, what can be the only object of communism? Reducing YOUR freedom, because that is the ONLY think that it has shown it can do effectively.
So, back to China, it is giving up the parts of communism that don't work (the economy part) and keeping the parts that DO work (destroying human freedom). So is China to be congratulated on its great strides towards freedom? I don't know.
Anyway, I guess the similarities between socialism and communism (the synonymity of their names, their end goal of more and more government control, etc.) make me think that the only REAL difference between communism and socialism is patience. They will both end up in the same place in the end, no?
In the odd chance that someone actually reads this 4th-level post, if you can point out another real difference between socialism and communism, I would seriously like to hear it.
Be proactive.
Watch out for yourself.
The only way to get a corporation to look out for your best interests is to convince it (remind it?) that your interests are their interests (happy customers!).
Make your interests clear by voting with your wallet. Is there a company out there that tries to fix security holes before the customer knows about them? If so, buy your products from them.
As I wrote that last bit, it occurred to me: perhaps leaving the security-hole-finding business up to the customer base is good business sense because it works and is cheaper than hiring your own security-hole-finders. I guess that brings us back to the proactive list.
In short, I agree totally with your post.
This makes no sense, as the no-bid contract was awarded before Bush was elected, and before the war on terror began.
I strongly feel that I have a better feel for the needs of my students than any of my elected representatives do.
I compare this to the war in Iraq. The reason we are still there is to liberate Iraq (insert knee-jerk, hugely off-topic ranting and raving here, on both sides of the issue). I don't think Americans have the stomach to wage war for money, just for right or wrong.
This was not intended to start a discussion on the morality of a war against Iraq, or indeed any war, just to examine motivations for war, and how far they can carry us.
The problem with that is that there are usually only 2 reasonable candidates for whom to vote once November comes around. Neither of them probably is fically responsible. So the next step is to get involved at the local level, at the part caucus in your community.
The next thing is to get involved in local politics, like mayor, county commission, etc. Big-time politicians have to start out somewhere, no?
Our elected representatives are STILL accountable to us, even though it seems clear that they have forgotten it, and are trying to help us forget it.
We CAN escape the debt, but it will take some serious work and belt-tightening on our part. Is it any wonder the government is in inescapable debt? The citizenry is in inescapable debt. Look up figures on the indebtedness of the citizens of the US. It's frightening.
Sadly, the US government is a reflection of its constituency.
Is that Bill O'Reilly?
So what were those lousy smegheads doing to the earth hundreds of thousands of years ago? Stupid cavemen and their earth-raping!
I agree that niether general acceptance nor credentials make a fact out of an opinion. So what does?
So when exactly does an opinion become fact? Does it require credentials? Does it require general acceptance?
I don't think this is what you're saying, but I don't know how else to take it.
Please clarify.
Why would the software be there during playback? The context is completely different, and I think it's clear that context seriously affects our perception.
I think Office is a fine product, but I always felt a little cheated that I couldn't read newer files on my older version.
Only half an hour, but I found it more clever even than spaceballs!
Loke: "I'm going to trust me feelings and use the power of the thumb."
Oobedoob: "Loke, use the instrument panel."
Loke: "What?"
Oobedoob: "The instrument panel. Advanced weaponry designed to hit tiny targets."
Loke: "Okay, okay."
Actually, I'm only half joking. I have it on good authority that 2001 is MUCH more enjoyable and less boring if you are hopped up while watching it. I don't remember what kind of drugs the guy said were best.
Disclaimer: I actually enjoyed 2001, and I have never done drugs.
I think you left out Ridiculous Speed.
Yes, thank you. The PowerGrade client. I need the client for things like linking the assignments to the standards, roll call, lunch count, etc.