I wish I had some mod points for you. If this is fraud (which it probably isn't) then the correct action is to take Best Buy to court. If it is just a bad deal, then educate yourself and your family/friends and don't buy it. Simple as that.
In fact, the best (meaning fastest, easiest, and most efficient) way to motivate people to do/learn something is by having it impact their wallet.
Didn't Ubuntu 9.10 ship with a but that causes AAAA queries to be sent even if you don't have any IPv6 addresses? I believe the workaround of disabling IPv6 in Firefox was much simpler than disabling IPv6 system wide. F11 might have a similar issue. Cut the guy a little slack.
You are so wrong that I think you might be a Troll, but I'll bite anyway.
where of course you assume that the person who had the money in the first place really deserved to have it.
Whether or not the person deserved the money, the government forcibly takes the money away. Whether or not the person deserved the money is up to the person who gave him the money, not to the government or you (thank god).
but a lot of persons today earn money without doing any useful work (e.g. they work for advertisment - creating artificial needs)
It's useful to the people paying them. Advertising can also inform people of solutions to their "real" needs. I'm not quite sure what an "artificial" need is.
or by doing harmful work (creating weapons, destroying the environment, etc...) or doing no work at all (just cashing in on their portfolio).
Weapons for self defense, no one runs a "destroy the environment" business, investing provides capital for people who produce things. These are terrible examples and are what make me think you're a troll.
the reason why some can earn a lot of money for nothing is in our system of society. this is an artificial system of laws and rules and it allows some to take the money from other persons without giving them anything useful in return.
Actually, the government is pretty much the only group that can force you to give them something without getting anything useful in return. You don't have to pay money to advertisers, weapon makers, or any other individual business unless you choose to.
so taking the money from people that have that money because of some artificial rules by an other rule (the tax system) is just one way to try to compensate the many faults of the capitalist system.....
You are implying that a fault of the capitalist system is that it is "artificial". That is silly. There are many faults of the capitalist (or at least the pure free market) system, but the fact that it is "artificial" is not one of them.
mond
Your name is attached to your post. You don't need to add it again.
Fear campaigns is what the RIAA and their kin have been running, and it has done little to nothing to change hearts and minds. At least not in their favor.
It always amazes me how many people think the way you do, but there are several things wrong with this kind of reasoning.
First of all, it completely ignores past work. The rich don't become rich overnight. Their hard work starts in high school if not earlier. Even if they have rich parents to help them pay for the best schools they still have to get good grades, and then spend another 4+ years in college. There is a small minority who have parents powerful enough to push them through those things with poor grades, but it is not as if every kid with well off parents becomes well off themselves.
Second, you have to look at the skill involved in what they do. Anyone can hammer nails into a house, or use a leaf blower on the streets. It takes a lot more knowledge to successfully make something out of a business. Not only does it require a large amount of technical knowledge, it requires critical thinking, and people skills as well.
Third, you may think you see the upper management doing nothing but yakking and golfing but that is far from the truth about how much they actually work. When the roof builder goes home, he leaves his work completely. The management types never leave work. When they go home their work follows them. It even follows them on vacation.
Now, don't take this to mean that I don't think there are CEOs and management out there that are bad at their jobs and are vastly overpaid. There are. But for most of the successful people, "being in the right place at the right time" is a matter of always being there, so that when an opportunity comes they have the chance and skill to take it.
Yes, yes you do. I am so sick of people harping on about the evil "Randian free market" as if everyone who believes in a free market must wholeheartedly agree with everything Rand ever wrote.
In the *real* world the leeching bastards are the receivers of government handouts. And all those resources you mentioned are paid for BY THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE MONEY. Something like 95+% of taxes come from the top 5% of earners. So stop pretending that they don't pay their fair share.
Even if they didn't your argument still doesn't hold water because by running a business and creating a valuable product, everyone else who buys their product and uses it gains something more than what they paid for it. So they already give more back to the country than they take just by selling something valuable. People that produce are the ones that make money and they are the ones that pay the taxes and they are the ones that pay for the resources that YOU use for your comfortable life.
I love how the GP presents a logical argument based in economic theory and all you can come up with is "LOL AYN RAND SUCKS!! SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE ARE ALL GREEDY, ITS THE POOR SMALL BUSINESSES THAT DO ALL THE REAL WORK! LOL!"
He's turning his back on the country that gave Ballmer opportunity to be where he is today.
Bullshit. MS has made wayyyyyyyyyy more money for people than they will ever make. That is the beauty of business. Every time someone sells a product or service they are both better off than they were before the transaction. To say it is unpatriotic to not want to pay high taxes is ridiculous.
Meanwhile, most of the rest of the world will say something sucks when most of the things that make up that something suck.
For example, I have said "television sucks" not because I think all television shows suck, or there is something inherently wrong with the medium. I said it because I think 99% of the shows on television are complete drivel, cater to the lowest common denominator, and glorify the damaged parts of society.
It's just a generalization, it is not meant to hold up in 100% of cases. I don't think it indicates narrow mindedness. It indicates loose use of language as is common everywhere.
I don't think that means that using religion as justification for war is not an indictment of religion. I think it means that nationalism and "FEAR OF" religion are indicted as well.
I couldn't agree with you more. I was at the Guggenheim museum in New York, a very well respected art museum and they had a couple displays that have zero value as far as I can tell.
One was titled "Blue Plank" and guess what it was? A plank painted blue. That is it.
Another one was "Copper Plate", a 2'x2' copper plate on the floor. The caption nearby said the artist was challenging convention by putting it on the floor. I thought it had just been too heavy to hang on the wall or something.
I think I've taken shits with more value than those exhibits.
If that doesn't prove that "having value" is in the eye of the beholder, I don't know what would.
The pure free market is not perfect because of externalities. Parties not involved in a transaction can be harmed by a transaction.
However, this flaw in the free market does not mean that we should dump it overboard and become communists or socialists. It means we should put simple taxes on externalities, such as CO2 pollution, and let the market deal with it from there. Anything beyond that will lead to inefficiency and corruption, like we have with ethanol subsidies. Then the only people that win are slimy politician types.
The free market + sound taxes on externalities leads to the best system for matching merit to reward that there is.
I don't think what MS did in this case was illegal.
As far as I can tell the argument goes like this:
1. Netscape has the most market share. 2. MS started bundling IE with Windows 3. IE took over the market 4. Therefore MS bundling IE with Windows was anti competitive and illegal.
Clearly this is faulty logic, so maybe I'm missing something. But faulty logic has never stopped politicians before. It's not like the other browser vendors have tried to be competitive. MS spends millions on advertising their OS with their browser. How much did Netscape, Mozilla, or Google spend advertising their browsers? I certainly haven't seen any ads on TV for them. How can they legitimately claim anti-competitive behavior on MS's part if they aren't even trying to compete?
You present no argument as to why MS's activities were actually illegal. You just say they broke the law as if that must be true. Maybe you should present an argument before getting all high and mighty?
Unfortunately, logic doesn't work too well with politicians, legislators, law enforcement officers, and judges, so I'm not a fan of relying solely on legislation and law enforcement to prevent bad things from happening.
Fixed that for you.
Teaching people not to do bad things by making them take responsibility for their actions forces them to learn to think before they act and prepares them to meet new situations.
Just telling people, "don't do these things cause they're bad, mmmk", is telling people not to think.
I would rather live in a society with people who use critical thought to make decisions and I believe it is vital to a strong democracy.
What the heck does making the ribbon optional have to do with inaccurate prediction? The kind of prediction you're talking about will be the same with or without the ribbon.
Slashdot Mirror
If it prevents you from putting certain other things in that spot, it may very well be even worse than a charger plug.
I wish I had some mod points for you. If this is fraud (which it probably isn't) then the correct action is to take Best Buy to court. If it is just a bad deal, then educate yourself and your family/friends and don't buy it. Simple as that.
In fact, the best (meaning fastest, easiest, and most efficient) way to motivate people to do/learn something is by having it impact their wallet.
Didn't Ubuntu 9.10 ship with a but that causes AAAA queries to be sent even if you don't have any IPv6 addresses? I believe the workaround of disabling IPv6 in Firefox was much simpler than disabling IPv6 system wide. F11 might have a similar issue. Cut the guy a little slack.
You are so wrong that I think you might be a Troll, but I'll bite anyway.
where of course you assume that the person who had the money in the first place really deserved to have it.
Whether or not the person deserved the money, the government forcibly takes the money away. Whether or not the person deserved the money is up to the person who gave him the money, not to the government or you (thank god).
but a lot of persons today earn money without doing any useful work (e.g. they work for advertisment - creating artificial needs)
It's useful to the people paying them. Advertising can also inform people of solutions to their "real" needs. I'm not quite sure what an "artificial" need is.
or by doing harmful work (creating weapons, destroying the environment, etc...) or doing no work at all (just cashing in on their portfolio).
Weapons for self defense, no one runs a "destroy the environment" business, investing provides capital for people who produce things. These are terrible examples and are what make me think you're a troll.
the reason why some can earn a lot of money for nothing is in our system of society. this is an artificial system of laws and rules and it allows some to take the money from other persons without giving them anything useful in return.
Actually, the government is pretty much the only group that can force you to give them something without getting anything useful in return. You don't have to pay money to advertisers, weapon makers, or any other individual business unless you choose to.
so taking the money from people that have that money because of some artificial rules by an other rule (the tax system) is just one way to try to compensate the many faults of the capitalist system.....
You are implying that a fault of the capitalist system is that it is "artificial". That is silly. There are many faults of the capitalist (or at least the pure free market) system, but the fact that it is "artificial" is not one of them.
mond
Your name is attached to your post. You don't need to add it again.
If you want people to use less electricity charge more for it and use the tax to fund something good like the huge budget deficit
Fixed that for you. You can't spend your way out of a deficit.
Hmmm, I've lived on the West Coast (California) my whole life and have never heard "trim" used that way.
Does it sting?
Come on. At least be honest. They'll listen to any lobbyist with bags of money. They don't have to be corporate.
The first company to actually do what you suggest would be the first to go out of business.
Fear campaigns is what the RIAA and their kin have been running, and it has done little to nothing to change hearts and minds. At least not in their favor.
It always amazes me how many people think the way you do, but there are several things wrong with this kind of reasoning.
First of all, it completely ignores past work. The rich don't become rich overnight. Their hard work starts in high school if not earlier. Even if they have rich parents to help them pay for the best schools they still have to get good grades, and then spend another 4+ years in college. There is a small minority who have parents powerful enough to push them through those things with poor grades, but it is not as if every kid with well off parents becomes well off themselves.
Second, you have to look at the skill involved in what they do. Anyone can hammer nails into a house, or use a leaf blower on the streets. It takes a lot more knowledge to successfully make something out of a business. Not only does it require a large amount of technical knowledge, it requires critical thinking, and people skills as well.
Third, you may think you see the upper management doing nothing but yakking and golfing but that is far from the truth about how much they actually work. When the roof builder goes home, he leaves his work completely. The management types never leave work. When they go home their work follows them. It even follows them on vacation.
Now, don't take this to mean that I don't think there are CEOs and management out there that are bad at their jobs and are vastly overpaid. There are. But for most of the successful people, "being in the right place at the right time" is a matter of always being there, so that when an opportunity comes they have the chance and skill to take it.
"No no I don't. "
Yes, yes you do. I am so sick of people harping on about the evil "Randian free market" as if everyone who believes in a free market must wholeheartedly agree with everything Rand ever wrote.
In the *real* world the leeching bastards are the receivers of government handouts. And all those resources you mentioned are paid for BY THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE MONEY. Something like 95+% of taxes come from the top 5% of earners. So stop pretending that they don't pay their fair share.
Even if they didn't your argument still doesn't hold water because by running a business and creating a valuable product, everyone else who buys their product and uses it gains something more than what they paid for it. So they already give more back to the country than they take just by selling something valuable. People that produce are the ones that make money and they are the ones that pay the taxes and they are the ones that pay for the resources that YOU use for your comfortable life.
I love how the GP presents a logical argument based in economic theory and all you can come up with is "LOL AYN RAND SUCKS!! SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE ARE ALL GREEDY, ITS THE POOR SMALL BUSINESSES THAT DO ALL THE REAL WORK! LOL!"
Take econ 101 for christ's sake.
He's turning his back on the country that gave Ballmer opportunity to be where he is today.
Bullshit. MS has made wayyyyyyyyyy more money for people than they will ever make. That is the beauty of business. Every time someone sells a product or service they are both better off than they were before the transaction. To say it is unpatriotic to not want to pay high taxes is ridiculous.
My Kingdom for some mod points!
Meanwhile, most of the rest of the world will say something sucks when most of the things that make up that something suck.
For example, I have said "television sucks" not because I think all television shows suck, or there is something inherently wrong with the medium. I said it because I think 99% of the shows on television are complete drivel, cater to the lowest common denominator, and glorify the damaged parts of society.
It's just a generalization, it is not meant to hold up in 100% of cases. I don't think it indicates narrow mindedness. It indicates loose use of language as is common everywhere.
I don't think that means that using religion as justification for war is not an indictment of religion. I think it means that nationalism and "FEAR OF" religion are indicted as well.
I couldn't agree with you more. I was at the Guggenheim museum in New York, a very well respected art museum and they had a couple displays that have zero value as far as I can tell.
One was titled "Blue Plank" and guess what it was? A plank painted blue. That is it.
Another one was "Copper Plate", a 2'x2' copper plate on the floor. The caption nearby said the artist was challenging convention by putting it on the floor. I thought it had just been too heavy to hang on the wall or something.
I think I've taken shits with more value than those exhibits.
If that doesn't prove that "having value" is in the eye of the beholder, I don't know what would.
I think I'll need some soma if I'm going to live in this Brave New World
The pure free market is not perfect because of externalities. Parties not involved in a transaction can be harmed by a transaction.
However, this flaw in the free market does not mean that we should dump it overboard and become communists or socialists. It means we should put simple taxes on externalities, such as CO2 pollution, and let the market deal with it from there. Anything beyond that will lead to inefficiency and corruption, like we have with ethanol subsidies. Then the only people that win are slimy politician types.
The free market + sound taxes on externalities leads to the best system for matching merit to reward that there is.
I don't think what MS did in this case was illegal.
As far as I can tell the argument goes like this:
1. Netscape has the most market share.
2. MS started bundling IE with Windows
3. IE took over the market
4. Therefore MS bundling IE with Windows was anti competitive and illegal.
Clearly this is faulty logic, so maybe I'm missing something. But faulty logic has never stopped politicians before. It's not like the other browser vendors have tried to be competitive. MS spends millions on advertising their OS with their browser. How much did Netscape, Mozilla, or Google spend advertising their browsers? I certainly haven't seen any ads on TV for them. How can they legitimately claim anti-competitive behavior on MS's part if they aren't even trying to compete?
You present no argument as to why MS's activities were actually illegal. You just say they broke the law as if that must be true. Maybe you should present an argument before getting all high and mighty?
Unfortunately, logic doesn't work too well with politicians, legislators, law enforcement officers, and judges, so I'm not a fan of relying solely on legislation and law enforcement to prevent bad things from happening.
Fixed that for you.
Teaching people not to do bad things by making them take responsibility for their actions forces them to learn to think before they act and prepares them to meet new situations.
Just telling people, "don't do these things cause they're bad, mmmk", is telling people not to think.
I would rather live in a society with people who use critical thought to make decisions and I believe it is vital to a strong democracy.
Well it's easier for the GP since it is some other guys crotch-fruit, not his.
What the heck does making the ribbon optional have to do with inaccurate prediction? The kind of prediction you're talking about will be the same with or without the ribbon.
If they packaged good documentation in book form, I might even consider buying it. And I know enough to download it for free.
In a tight economy I bet they will be less likely to say that.