Your grandkids may like to see the photos of you having fun on your trip, or finger-painting with pasta sauce, or cleaning a dog that is covered in mud, or anything
In more civilized cultures insinuating that your parent poster's grandchildren might be severely retarded would be considered a grave insult.
Rampant inflation doesn't hurt the lower class nearly as much as the rich (because wages rise too). People with money are hurt when the value of that money falls. If you have no money inflation can't hurt you. If you have lots of debt (for example, middle class and lower class households with credit cards) it can really help you. If you're poor you should be pro-inflation.
Alright, I'll grant you that's a semi-sensible argument (for an MBA), but it makes you sound like Darth Vader and it makes me throw up a little in my mouth (but that could just be the whisky).
It's a story because of the inconsistency: Books are OK, Kindles are not. There is no sensible (non-Luddite) reason for this. Other commenters have mentioned loiterers (irrelevant because there is no difference between loitering w/ a book vs kindle) and bandwidth usage (bandwidth overuse, on a kindle, are you fucking kidding me?). Both are irrelevant. What possible, sensible reason could there be for banning Kindles and NOT books?
Sure, they CAN do this. What I haven't heard yet is how it isn't utterly retarded to do so. The sheer stupidity makes it noteworthy.
You do realize that your entire post is irrelevant to the issue at hand--they banned eReaders, not reading. The policy is Books: Yes, eReaders: No. That is ridiculous.
I don't actually disagree with your post, it's just not relevant.
This ignore real limitations in hard resources, specifically metals (not so much organic materials that we can grow more of, though they become increasingly expensive). At the end of the day we can only build so many durable widgets out of copper/iron/nickel/etc. That stuff is zero sum (barring some revolution in orbital launch technology that makes it cheap enough to mine other rocks in the solar system), and trying to raise the rest of the world to the current American standard would almost certainly exhaust it. Bottom line is that the rising standard of the rest of the world gaurantees a fall (or at a minimum a radical change) in the material standard of the west, because there is only so much metal to go around. The productivity of individual workers isn't the problem.
Meanwhile, you can profit off the resulting market overreactions. An email to the CEO after the fact may get the manager wanting "offshoring" fired himself.
No, in the real world people compromise their ethics for economic considerations. This is not the same thing as the economical and ethical being connected.
That is why the damages and fees in the cases can reach the insane. It is to make piracy not worth it.
I can make up fairy tale reasons for things too. The earth goes around the sun because banana!
The reason damages are so high is because the laws were originally written with large-scale commercial copyright infringement in mind. That used to be the only kind of copyright infringement that was feasible. The penalties have simply never been adjusted because the *AA likes it the way it is.
Slashdot Mirror
Except for Jeopardy of course.
Your grandkids may like to see the photos of you having fun on your trip, or finger-painting with pasta sauce, or cleaning a dog that is covered in mud, or anything
In more civilized cultures insinuating that your parent poster's grandchildren might be severely retarded would be considered a grave insult.
I don't know if asking for a face book login is right or wrong.
Well then allow me to enlighten you: it's wrong.
Everyone else has to trade privacy for some other benefit.
No, no they don't, and, no, no they shouldn't.
People like you are the reason this country is fucked.
Rampant inflation doesn't hurt the lower class nearly as much as the rich (because wages rise too). People with money are hurt when the value of that money falls. If you have no money inflation can't hurt you. If you have lots of debt (for example, middle class and lower class households with credit cards) it can really help you. If you're poor you should be pro-inflation.
Probably everyone. It's not like bash is some obscure thing no /.er has ever heard of.
What are the odds of that outputting 'Compaqt'?
He said the exact opposite. And yes, he died of (very likely anyway) cigar-related cancer (definitely the cancer, very likely from the cigars).
So, where'd you get your MBA?
Alright, I'll grant you that's a semi-sensible argument (for an MBA), but it makes you sound like Darth Vader and it makes me throw up a little in my mouth (but that could just be the whisky).
It's a story because of the inconsistency: Books are OK, Kindles are not. There is no sensible (non-Luddite) reason for this. Other commenters have mentioned loiterers (irrelevant because there is no difference between loitering w/ a book vs kindle) and bandwidth usage (bandwidth overuse, on a kindle, are you fucking kidding me?). Both are irrelevant. What possible, sensible reason could there be for banning Kindles and NOT books?
Sure, they CAN do this. What I haven't heard yet is how it isn't utterly retarded to do so. The sheer stupidity makes it noteworthy.
It is when GGP is retarded. /ontopic
So if I bring in a non-standard quantity of melanin, can they refuse to serve me?
Who takes a laptop to a bar?
It's the one environment where you DON'T need access to porn.
What does this have to do with banning eReaders, but not banning books?
You do realize that your entire post is irrelevant to the issue at hand--they banned eReaders, not reading. The policy is Books: Yes, eReaders: No. That is ridiculous.
I don't actually disagree with your post, it's just not relevant.
CEO probably can't fire the Senior VP unilaterally anyway. Regardless, the I don't think the NLRA applies to management.
OP sacrificed his to not help theirs.
You start with the Calvinist perversion of the bible and just run with it.
Talk about a strawman. What about the workers in the country the help center is outsourced? Do their wives/children not get sick too?
This ignore real limitations in hard resources, specifically metals (not so much organic materials that we can grow more of, though they become increasingly expensive). At the end of the day we can only build so many durable widgets out of copper/iron/nickel/etc. That stuff is zero sum (barring some revolution in orbital launch technology that makes it cheap enough to mine other rocks in the solar system), and trying to raise the rest of the world to the current American standard would almost certainly exhaust it. Bottom line is that the rising standard of the rest of the world gaurantees a fall (or at a minimum a radical change) in the material standard of the west, because there is only so much metal to go around. The productivity of individual workers isn't the problem.
And they're right. Look at what consumerism has done to this country.
Meanwhile, you can profit off the resulting market overreactions. An email to the CEO after the fact may get the manager wanting "offshoring" fired himself.
It's also just asking to get thrown in jail.
I doubt any objectivist would ever argue from morality. Randians tend not to give a fuck.
No, in the real world people compromise their ethics for economic considerations. This is not the same thing as the economical and ethical being connected.
The Federal Government cannot own copyrights by law.
That is why the damages and fees in the cases can reach the insane. It is to make piracy not worth it.
I can make up fairy tale reasons for things too. The earth goes around the sun because banana!
The reason damages are so high is because the laws were originally written with large-scale commercial copyright infringement in mind. That used to be the only kind of copyright infringement that was feasible. The penalties have simply never been adjusted because the *AA likes it the way it is.