It's because trying to lead open-source developers is like herding cats. Unless you're holding their can of food, they won't go where you want. And if you can't make all of them focus on the single project you want accomplished, you don't get anything done without a huge mass of so many people that everyone can do what they please
The difference is you presumption of a negative connotation. If a person is proud of who they are, they may well want to pass as much of that along to their children as possible. That isn't racism, it's identity. My whole family has blue eyes. When I look as my nephews, I see their blue eyes and how they are so very similar to their father's and to mine. I wouldn't love them less if they had brown eyes, but I also wouldn't have that similarity/connection with them. I can only assume that you would want to have your offspring to share in your traits as well. My point about "want(ing) their children to be Primordial Dwarves" was that, within a community bound together by the genetic trait of primordial dwarfism, that trait would be a source of pride and would be seen as a positive thing to be passed on. Any negative feelings surrounding that idea are brought by our different culture. To suggest that a person wouldn't want their child to be like them would seem to be a deeper prejudice to me. Deaf parents are requesting deaf children after all. Once you remove the idea that these people are somehow "broken" it makes a lot of sense. As the Darwinian influences of predators and medical difficulties and the need for physical prowess, all subside so to must the Darwinian born ideals of what make a person "complete" subside.
it sounds like Jackson is just another spoiled little brat
Just like my ADD was "just lazy and undisciplined"? TFA didn't seem to mention the particular condition that Jackson has, but I know autistic kids that have some socially unwelcome reactions to seemingly minor things. I think it has to do with their perceptual differences, what seems important to them seems unimportant to us and vice versa. Where you think it is no big deal for Jackson to sit in a different chair, jackson may see a deep interruption to his daily ritual. Where you think of his screaming as frustrating and embarassing, he thinks that a scream is just a noise and is trivial. That is part of why a community of autistic children would likely form an etiquette that is foreign to us. Your reaction, which would be most anyone's reaction if Jackson where screaming in a foodcourt or church, is why the parents of these children have sought to form group with like families.
but in the end, messing with a zygote to give it three eyes or a saucer-shaped head is not worse than not allowing it to live at all.
You must have a very negative view of the afterlife. Everyone dies, it is just a question of when and how much it hurts.
Genetic disease/deformity is one of the best reasons for maintaining legal abortions. In the interests of giving every zygote the highest possible quality of life it is sometime necessary to end that life in the first trimester. It is akin to shooting someone in the head when they are in the midst of burning to death. Deaf parents requesting deaf children is lowering the possible quality of life of the zygote.
So if "the genetically rare" for their own communities they will inevitably forge their own traditions and standards. ie: a different standard of beauty "There was no missing the similarities: the flat bridge of their noses, the thin lips, the fold near the corner of their eyes" or different etiquette "If one of his siblings is sitting at his place at the breakfast table, Jackson screams. If a schoolmate gets too close to him, Jackson screams. If someone interrupts him while he is speaking, Jackson screams." So this community is well on it's way to being a separate culture. That's fine, perhaps even wonderful. I'm curious about the long term. This new culture, being originally based around genetic differences, will carry these differences from generation to generation. People want children who carry on their traits and culture, if that includes a standard of beauty that is inline with the facial structure and body size of Primordial Dwarfism, then it would make sense that they would want their children to be Primordial Dwarves. I'm wondering at what point of maintaining a consistent genetic difference would that culture become a parallel species in the way that Homo Erectus and Homo Ergaster lived side by side.
I hope that no one takes offense at my ponderings. I do not mean to suggest that anyone born with a genetic difference is less than human. I am simply wondering if and when those differences will become self sustaining and a primary characteristic within a newly forming culture and if that would require a new scientific classification. Humanity is more than just genetics.
Thank you for the clarification. Given that The Ten Commandments are the base for most western laws/morality. I would suspect that the mistranslation was not always mistranslated. It is widely regarded in western cultures as immoral and a breach of the social contract to murder someone, but to kill someone in the defense of you family or nation is perhaps regrettable but not immoral. In King James'es day perhaps "Thou shalt not kill" held the correct connotations or perhaps it was subtle change made by a pacifist monk. Either way 50% of the words use in "Thou shalt not kill" are no longer in common use today, how could we think that the statement is "unambiguous".
Perhaps the idea that the writers wouldn't get the same percentage of compensation for an internet release of their work as they would get for a DVD release of their work, is absurd. You would have never heard about this, except that they do have a union. People who know that their company is heavily dependent on them and yet do not feel treated well at that company, and talk about "screw this I'm gonna go somewhere else" in the breakroom but never do it; they are absurd. One singular worker thinking that their protest march of one is going to change the bottom line hunting of dozens of executive level managers; that is absurd. That you think that an industry halting is "ludicrous" and that this is something that the studio heads "allow" tells me that you are either: a)wealthy and powerful enough that you actually consider yourself better that those who work for you. b)operate under such a surf's mentality that you think it is wrong to publicly disobey Master.
hat one lesson overrides the need for almost every other "protective" law possible.
But new pedophile laws must be passed so there are unstoppable vehicles to attach the most shameful earmarks to. Really, do any legislators ever vote against any sex offender laws?
It would be interesting to compare the punishments of male and female child molesters.
Your wording there just highlighted on of the prime problems with our current "sex offender" laws,definitions, and perceptions. The is a huge world of difference between a child molester (has physical sexual contact with a child that has not yet reached puberty) and Ephebophilia (sexual attraction to adolescents). There is an even greater difference between actual child molesters and someone who streaks a football game, and is seen by minors. Or a minor who takes naked pictures of themselves. Or how about failing to have a good pop-up blocker.
I'm all for stopping the who will lure or grab a child off a playground, but why is this the one class of criminals that has to "register" for a lifetime of rejection and fear. Why don't drunk drivers have to register and why are they allowed near bars again? Why don't those convicted of libel have to identify themselves as such when posting online? If someone rapes a child perhaps they should be locked away for life, but if a lesser crime doesn't call for lifetime incarceration, then it shouldn't call for lifetime tracking.
very feminine beauty parlor, or a lingerie department....They know their target demographic.
Now that you mention it, I see a much higher percentage of women in the Apple store, than I do in the CompUSA a few blocks away. There isn't a Fry's in NYC, so I can't compare to that although earlier posts have hailed it as a tech mecca. I wonder what percentage of Fry's customers are women?
if I hadn't registered it it wouldn't be mine, now would it?
For most domain names I would agree, but when personal names or trademarked business names are taken I think it becomes more of a grey area. For example, why would anyone other than Wal-mart Inc. have a legit claim to walmart.*** Sure walmart.com.net.org are owned by the company, but landing.domainsponsor.com appears to own rights walmart.tv. What possible reason could they have for registering that domain other than to extort Wal-mart or infringe on the Wal-mart brand name? Domain names suffer from one of the same problems as patents, there is no requirement for the owner to bring the property to market within a reasonable time period. Squatting doesn't bring anything of value to society.
at least the stuff made by Japan Inc works. Can't say the same for stuff made by USACorp.
Hey planned obsolescence worked quite nicely for decades. Don't think our consumer psychology would be the same in the western world without it. Hell, some people still buy a new car/tv/whatever every three to five years because planned obsolescence has taught us that older consumer products are junk. The stuff works fine, just the way it was designed to.
Don't forget the other key to Wal-mart success, all-in-one convenience vs. smaller retailers. For someone with kids in tow, being able to buy groceries and shoes and school supplies all in one place is going to be much easier. Another factor that has no baring on digital distribution. A harder to measure influence would be stigma. Wal-mart is anti-glamorous, Netflicks and iTunes are moderately cool.
I don't understand why anonymous slander is illegal. Where's the credibility?
Sadly, creditability is a moot point for much of the world. Critical Thinking is not taught to school children, only the rote memorization of (often trivial) facts. Carry those learning habits into adulthood and it is no wonder that the gossip culture is booming in most industrialized cultures? A rumor doesn't have to be true it just has to be repeated.
Really? Completely gone, baby and bathwater? I hope you like low/middle wage factory jobs, because without IP America will have to return to a manufacturing economy.
Most vague idea patents are obvious. Imagine of such a lack of specificity could be applied to copyright. I would copyright "the adventures of a young boy as he grows into a man." and "The story of young lovers and the events surrounding their courtship." That covers about 25% of all fictional literature.
Maybe I should patent "a process to fix the US Patent system through more stringent and precise documentation of the invention"
Your point about the Monkeysphere is well made. The Us-vs-Them I'm speaking of is parallel to but not the same as the monkeysphere. The key difference is in the acceptability of putting a human face on "them". Very few people will get angry at you if you suggest feeling sympathy for the victims of an earthquake on the far side of the world, but if you suggest treating "the enemy" with compassion you will angrily be told "them get what they deserve." This change in mindset is part of War. A compassionate war is an impossible thing, so in a legitimate war this is a necessary mindset. There is a problem when the war and enemy are vague and unending. Political dissent becomes "siding with the enemy" instead of a healthy part of a lively democracy.
Seriously, I don't see what the problem with this is.
The problem is fear mongering. It immediately puts the populace in a state of mind that is submissive to the leadership. People drop into a us vs.them mindset. Criminals (or anyone accused of being a criminal) stop being thought of as real people, they simply become them. Anyone questioning the leadership must be siding with the rapists and murderers. There is already a growing divide between the common people and the government's agents (Homeland security and the police). No one feels safer when a cop is looking at them, regardless of if you have done anything wrong. The police are more and more inclined to treat citizens as "the enemy" The only way that the mass population will put up with these conditions is when they believe that it is necessary because they government is protecting us for a much greater evil.
This is a game already played with the terrorists, but that's getting really expensive, and the military is stretched too thin. The government needs to bring the boogeyman home.
The company said that during the next five years, a "wave of connectivity" between vehicles and roadways will help keep traffic flowing smoothly
Yeah the theoretical technology might exist, but major improvements to the national infrastructure will take decades to implement.
"Dishwashers, air conditioners, house lights, and more will be connected directly to a 'smart' electric grid,
Again this require a major improvement to parts of the infrastructure. On top of that, my parents already own all the appliances they want, they will not likely get many new ones anytime in the next five years. Maybe an HDTV.
For example, phones will enable users to snap a photo of an article of clothing, pull in results from the Web about the brand and where to buy it, and then render the garment on top of a 3-D image of the user, IBM said.
Many stores I have been in do not let you photograph the merchandise, if you can suddenly comparison shop the goods in any given store I can only see that policy getting stronger.
This article sounds more like "The World of Tomorrow" than something I would expect out of a respected technology company.
I've managed individuals that are off-the-charts effective when uninterrupted, but easily get lost in the crush of emails.
What you have indirectly acknowledged and TFA did not, is that different people have different inherent skills. Of course different skills will place and/or limit people within the business hierarchy. If someone is only very effective when dealing with three or less requests at a time, then they will forever have to be under close management. They cannot ever be project heads or work independently on anything but the most basic projects. That isn't a problem for most businesses but the career limits might be a problem for the individual. Especially if the individual has to take a step or two down the management ladder because they cannot multi-task. I think this isn't a case of overload, but of changing requirements of what it takes to get ahead in the modern business world. The problem is that this change relocates many older employees who have already maxed out under the Peter Principle. Someone who was good enough in a position ten years ago might not be able to cut it under the new rules, so you have to demote them or insert new layers of management.
you need to make sure that there is some sort of sound barrier between the equipment area and your working area....lots of A/C ducting near the equipment...
That is and important first consideration, along with a door to close so that the office temperature can be warmer than the server room temperature. Beyond that I would like to add: Make the IT office on the far side of the bathroom and break room from everyone else. Keep out of the usual pathways for management. A dim narrow dead end hallway to get to the door. The IT area might need to be on an outside wall for the servers extra AC (and a window for you). If management wants it IT out of sight, great. Just make the exile comfortable and peaceful.
Why not just make capital gains a progressive tax, like income is now? Hell, just make it count as income. And before you rant about how "then no one will invest" bullshit. People will still invest, because otherwise they actually have to spend hours of their lives working to make money. The only way to have income without clocking in to a job, is to have capital investments. Most people don't make all that much off of their investments, but the wealthiest 20% of society owns 84% of the investments,http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html yet they pay half of the tax rate as the working class. And the working class has to actually show up to work. If anything the tax rates between income and capital gains should be swapped. I doubt the billionaires of our country would suddenly drop all of their investments because of a 16% tax increase, they will still make more per year that the median lifetime income. They will still have mansions and private planes and month long vacations to their beach front place in Bora Bora. Where as a 16% tax drop for middle America would make a huge difference in the lives of millions of people. Everyone could afford insurance with that, or have the option of getting their kids out of crappy public schools, or maybe just get out of the debit that is strangling the middle class.
Taxed twice on investments? 33% once then 25% on long term gains? Yuck. No one will ever pay income and then capital gains on the same money, don't be obtuse. The capital gains is only paid on the additional money brought in by the investment, so that is a different stream of income.
Slashdot Mirror
It's because trying to lead open-source developers is like herding cats. Unless you're holding their can of food, they won't go where you want. And if you can't make all of them focus on the single project you want accomplished, you don't get anything done without a huge mass of so many people that everyone can do what they please
I believe the phrase "design by committee" is what you are looking for.
Since when do street lights work with batteries ?
Since early October, only in Austria. Here is a link that tells you all about it.
In other news: RTFA.
How is this -any- different than racism?
The difference is you presumption of a negative connotation. If a person is proud of who they are, they may well want to pass as much of that along to their children as possible. That isn't racism, it's identity. My whole family has blue eyes. When I look as my nephews, I see their blue eyes and how they are so very similar to their father's and to mine. I wouldn't love them less if they had brown eyes, but I also wouldn't have that similarity/connection with them. I can only assume that you would want to have your offspring to share in your traits as well. My point about "want(ing) their children to be Primordial Dwarves" was that, within a community bound together by the genetic trait of primordial dwarfism, that trait would be a source of pride and would be seen as a positive thing to be passed on. Any negative feelings surrounding that idea are brought by our different culture. To suggest that a person wouldn't want their child to be like them would seem to be a deeper prejudice to me. Deaf parents are requesting deaf children after all. Once you remove the idea that these people are somehow "broken" it makes a lot of sense. As the Darwinian influences of predators and medical difficulties and the need for physical prowess, all subside so to must the Darwinian born ideals of what make a person "complete" subside.
it sounds like Jackson is just another spoiled little brat
Just like my ADD was "just lazy and undisciplined"?
TFA didn't seem to mention the particular condition that Jackson has, but I know autistic kids that have some socially unwelcome reactions to seemingly minor things. I think it has to do with their perceptual differences, what seems important to them seems unimportant to us and vice versa. Where you think it is no big deal for Jackson to sit in a different chair, jackson may see a deep interruption to his daily ritual. Where you think of his screaming as frustrating and embarassing, he thinks that a scream is just a noise and is trivial. That is part of why a community of autistic children would likely form an etiquette that is foreign to us. Your reaction, which would be most anyone's reaction if Jackson where screaming in a foodcourt or church, is why the parents of these children have sought to form group with like families.
but in the end, messing with a zygote to give it three eyes or a saucer-shaped head is not worse than not allowing it to live at all.
You must have a very negative view of the afterlife. Everyone dies, it is just a question of when and how much it hurts.
Genetic disease/deformity is one of the best reasons for maintaining legal abortions. In the interests of giving every zygote the highest possible quality of life it is sometime necessary to end that life in the first trimester. It is akin to shooting someone in the head when they are in the midst of burning to death. Deaf parents requesting deaf children is lowering the possible quality of life of the zygote.
So if "the genetically rare" for their own communities they will inevitably forge their own traditions and standards. ie: a different standard of beauty "There was no missing the similarities: the flat bridge of their noses, the thin lips, the fold near the corner of their eyes" or different etiquette "If one of his siblings is sitting at his place at the breakfast table, Jackson screams. If a schoolmate gets too close to him, Jackson screams. If someone interrupts him while he is speaking, Jackson screams." So this community is well on it's way to being a separate culture. That's fine, perhaps even wonderful. I'm curious about the long term. This new culture, being originally based around genetic differences, will carry these differences from generation to generation. People want children who carry on their traits and culture, if that includes a standard of beauty that is inline with the facial structure and body size of Primordial Dwarfism, then it would make sense that they would want their children to be Primordial Dwarves. I'm wondering at what point of maintaining a consistent genetic difference would that culture become a parallel species in the way that Homo Erectus and Homo Ergaster lived side by side.
I hope that no one takes offense at my ponderings. I do not mean to suggest that anyone born with a genetic difference is less than human. I am simply wondering if and when those differences will become self sustaining and a primary characteristic within a newly forming culture and if that would require a new scientific classification. Humanity is more than just genetics.
Thank you for the clarification. Given that The Ten Commandments are the base for most western laws/morality. I would suspect that the mistranslation was not always mistranslated. It is widely regarded in western cultures as immoral and a breach of the social contract to murder someone, but to kill someone in the defense of you family or nation is perhaps regrettable but not immoral. In King James'es day perhaps "Thou shalt not kill" held the correct connotations or perhaps it was subtle change made by a pacifist monk. Either way 50% of the words use in "Thou shalt not kill" are no longer in common use today, how could we think that the statement is "unambiguous".
The idea that they have a union is absurd
Perhaps the idea that the writers wouldn't get the same percentage of compensation for an internet release of their work as they would get for a DVD release of their work, is absurd. You would have never heard about this, except that they do have a union. People who know that their company is heavily dependent on them and yet do not feel treated well at that company, and talk about "screw this I'm gonna go somewhere else" in the breakroom but never do it; they are absurd. One singular worker thinking that their protest march of one is going to change the bottom line hunting of dozens of executive level managers; that is absurd.
That you think that an industry halting is "ludicrous" and that this is something that the studio heads "allow" tells me that you are either: a)wealthy and powerful enough that you actually consider yourself better that those who work for you. b)operate under such a surf's mentality that you think it is wrong to publicly disobey Master.
hat one lesson overrides the need for almost every other "protective" law possible.
But new pedophile laws must be passed so there are unstoppable vehicles to attach the most shameful earmarks to. Really, do any legislators ever vote against any sex offender laws?
It would be interesting to compare the punishments of male and female child molesters.
Your wording there just highlighted on of the prime problems with our current "sex offender" laws,definitions, and perceptions. The is a huge world of difference between a child molester (has physical sexual contact with a child that has not yet reached puberty) and Ephebophilia (sexual attraction to adolescents). There is an even greater difference between actual child molesters and someone who streaks a football game, and is seen by minors. Or a minor who takes naked pictures of themselves. Or how about failing to have a good pop-up blocker.
I'm all for stopping the who will lure or grab a child off a playground, but why is this the one class of criminals that has to "register" for a lifetime of rejection and fear. Why don't drunk drivers have to register and why are they allowed near bars again? Why don't those convicted of libel have to identify themselves as such when posting online? If someone rapes a child perhaps they should be locked away for life, but if a lesser crime doesn't call for lifetime incarceration, then it shouldn't call for lifetime tracking.
very feminine beauty parlor, or a lingerie department....They know their target demographic.
Now that you mention it, I see a much higher percentage of women in the Apple store, than I do in the CompUSA a few blocks away. There isn't a Fry's in NYC, so I can't compare to that although earlier posts have hailed it as a tech mecca. I wonder what percentage of Fry's customers are women?
if I hadn't registered it it wouldn't be mine, now would it?
.net .org are owned by the company, but landing.domainsponsor.com appears to own rights walmart.tv. What possible reason could they have for registering that domain other than to extort Wal-mart or infringe on the Wal-mart brand name? Domain names suffer from one of the same problems as patents, there is no requirement for the owner to bring the property to market within a reasonable time period. Squatting doesn't bring anything of value to society.
For most domain names I would agree, but when personal names or trademarked business names are taken I think it becomes more of a grey area. For example, why would anyone other than Wal-mart Inc. have a legit claim to walmart.*** Sure walmart.com
at least the stuff made by Japan Inc works. Can't say the same for stuff made by USACorp.
Hey planned obsolescence worked quite nicely for decades. Don't think our consumer psychology would be the same in the western world without it. Hell, some people still buy a new car/tv/whatever every three to five years because planned obsolescence has taught us that older consumer products are junk. The stuff works fine, just the way it was designed to.
Don't forget the other key to Wal-mart success, all-in-one convenience vs. smaller retailers. For someone with kids in tow, being able to buy groceries and shoes and school supplies all in one place is going to be much easier. Another factor that has no baring on digital distribution. A harder to measure influence would be stigma. Wal-mart is anti-glamorous, Netflicks and iTunes are moderately cool.
I don't understand why anonymous slander is illegal. Where's the credibility?
Sadly, creditability is a moot point for much of the world. Critical Thinking is not taught to school children, only the rote memorization of (often trivial) facts. Carry those learning habits into adulthood and it is no wonder that the gossip culture is booming in most industrialized cultures? A rumor doesn't have to be true it just has to be repeated.
That whole "intellectual property" thing is over.
Really? Completely gone, baby and bathwater? I hope you like low/middle wage factory jobs, because without IP America will have to return to a manufacturing economy.
Apple bad, record industry good?
I think it's more like "Apple good, hands clue-phone to Warner Records."
this is an obvious patent.
Most vague idea patents are obvious. Imagine of such a lack of specificity could be applied to copyright. I would copyright "the adventures of a young boy as he grows into a man." and "The story of young lovers and the events surrounding their courtship." That covers about 25% of all fictional literature.
Maybe I should patent "a process to fix the US Patent system through more stringent and precise documentation of the invention"
Your point about the Monkeysphere is well made. The Us-vs-Them I'm speaking of is parallel to but not the same as the monkeysphere. The key difference is in the acceptability of putting a human face on "them". Very few people will get angry at you if you suggest feeling sympathy for the victims of an earthquake on the far side of the world, but if you suggest treating "the enemy" with compassion you will angrily be told "them get what they deserve." This change in mindset is part of War. A compassionate war is an impossible thing, so in a legitimate war this is a necessary mindset. There is a problem when the war and enemy are vague and unending. Political dissent becomes "siding with the enemy" instead of a healthy part of a lively democracy.
Seriously, I don't see what the problem with this is.
The problem is fear mongering. It immediately puts the populace in a state of mind that is submissive to the leadership. People drop into a us vs.them mindset. Criminals (or anyone accused of being a criminal) stop being thought of as real people, they simply become them. Anyone questioning the leadership must be siding with the rapists and murderers. There is already a growing divide between the common people and the government's agents (Homeland security and the police). No one feels safer when a cop is looking at them, regardless of if you have done anything wrong. The police are more and more inclined to treat citizens as "the enemy" The only way that the mass population will put up with these conditions is when they believe that it is necessary because they government is protecting us for a much greater evil.
This is a game already played with the terrorists, but that's getting really expensive, and the military is stretched too thin. The government needs to bring the boogeyman home.
Not all intergalactic problems can be reduced to a simple Star Trek formula.
But they can all be solved by reversing the polarity.
The company said that during the next five years, a "wave of connectivity" between vehicles and roadways will help keep traffic flowing smoothly
Yeah the theoretical technology might exist, but major improvements to the national infrastructure will take decades to implement.
"Dishwashers, air conditioners, house lights, and more will be connected directly to a 'smart' electric grid,
Again this require a major improvement to parts of the infrastructure. On top of that, my parents already own all the appliances they want, they will not likely get many new ones anytime in the next five years. Maybe an HDTV.
For example, phones will enable users to snap a photo of an article of clothing, pull in results from the Web about the brand and where to buy it, and then render the garment on top of a 3-D image of the user, IBM said.
Many stores I have been in do not let you photograph the merchandise, if you can suddenly comparison shop the goods in any given store I can only see that policy getting stronger.
This article sounds more like "The World of Tomorrow" than something I would expect out of a respected technology company.
I've managed individuals that are off-the-charts effective when uninterrupted, but easily get lost in the crush of emails.
What you have indirectly acknowledged and TFA did not, is that different people have different inherent skills. Of course different skills will place and/or limit people within the business hierarchy. If someone is only very effective when dealing with three or less requests at a time, then they will forever have to be under close management. They cannot ever be project heads or work independently on anything but the most basic projects. That isn't a problem for most businesses but the career limits might be a problem for the individual. Especially if the individual has to take a step or two down the management ladder because they cannot multi-task. I think this isn't a case of overload, but of changing requirements of what it takes to get ahead in the modern business world. The problem is that this change relocates many older employees who have already maxed out under the Peter Principle. Someone who was good enough in a position ten years ago might not be able to cut it under the new rules, so you have to demote them or insert new layers of management.
you need to make sure that there is some sort of sound barrier between the equipment area and your working area....lots of A/C ducting near the equipment...
That is and important first consideration, along with a door to close so that the office temperature can be warmer than the server room temperature. Beyond that I would like to add: Make the IT office on the far side of the bathroom and break room from everyone else. Keep out of the usual pathways for management. A dim narrow dead end hallway to get to the door. The IT area might need to be on an outside wall for the servers extra AC (and a window for you). If management wants it IT out of sight, great. Just make the exile comfortable and peaceful.
Why not just make capital gains a progressive tax, like income is now? Hell, just make it count as income. And before you rant about how "then no one will invest" bullshit. People will still invest, because otherwise they actually have to spend hours of their lives working to make money. The only way to have income without clocking in to a job, is to have capital investments. Most people don't make all that much off of their investments, but the wealthiest 20% of society owns 84% of the investments,http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html yet they pay half of the tax rate as the working class. And the working class has to actually show up to work. If anything the tax rates between income and capital gains should be swapped. I doubt the billionaires of our country would suddenly drop all of their investments because of a 16% tax increase, they will still make more per year that the median lifetime income. They will still have mansions and private planes and month long vacations to their beach front place in Bora Bora. Where as a 16% tax drop for middle America would make a huge difference in the lives of millions of people. Everyone could afford insurance with that, or have the option of getting their kids out of crappy public schools, or maybe just get out of the debit that is strangling the middle class.
Taxed twice on investments? 33% once then 25% on long term gains? Yuck.
No one will ever pay income and then capital gains on the same money, don't be obtuse. The capital gains is only paid on the additional money brought in by the investment, so that is a different stream of income.