Will the Mars colony depend upon re-supply missions from Earth, or will it be able to sustain itself (and replicate itself) indefinitely? If it is not self-sufficient, which elements must be re-supplied from Earth?
Regulations like these enable businesses to have more productive employees without having to pay them more. We can pay workers enough to afford good food, or we can have the government artificially increase the price of bad food so that good food is cheapest. The poor will then be forced to divert some of their income from other areas (e.g. education, clothing, healthcare) to food, since there will be no cheaper options. In the words of Chesterton: "Without the trouble of adding twopence to her wages, he has added twopenny-worth to her food. In short, she has the holy satisfaction of being worth more without being paid more."
It's not about the social costs of healthcare -- it's about the benefits of a healthier workforce to the employers. By lobbying the government to outlaw obesity, they are getting higher productivity per worker at no cost.
"An employer, let us say, pays a seamstress twopence a day, and she does not seem to thrive on it. So little, perhaps, does she thrive on it that the employer has even some difficulty in thriving upon her. There are only two things that he can do, and the distinction between them cuts the whole social and political world in two. It is a touchstone by which we can—not sometimes, but always—distinguish economic equality from servile social reform. He can give the girl some magnificent sum, such as sixpence a day, to do as she likes with, and trust that her improved health and temper will work for the benefit of his business. Or he may keep her to the original sum of a shilling a week, but earmark each of the pennies to be used or not to be used for a particular purpose. If she must not spend this penny on a bunch of violets, or that penny on a novelette, or the other penny on a toy for some baby, it is possible that she will concentrate her expenditure more upon physical necessities, and so become, from the employer's point of view, a more efficient person. Without the trouble of adding twopence to her wages, he has added twopenny-worth to her food. In short, she has the holy satisfaction of being worth more without being paid more.
This Capitalist is an ingenious person, and has many polished characteristics; but I think the most singular thing about him is his staggering lack of shame. Neither the hour of death nor the day of reckoning, neither the tent of exile nor the house of mourning, neither chivalry nor patriotism, neither womanhood nor widowhood, is safe at this supreme moment from his dirty little expedient of dieting the slave." --G. K. Chesterton, _Utopia of Usurers_
For most people, getting ahead takes hard work. It's a lot easier to seek out entertainment than the knowledge and skills required to get ahead. This article seems to be right in line with what most people would expect.
That's why I spend all of my free time reading important news on Slashdot instead of wasting time on unproductive digital entertainment.
I get all of my news from weekly magazines: The Economist, The New Yorker, and The New York Review of Books. They actually report on things that are important (that is, things that I consider important), because I am paying them. Free online news exploits my psychological weaknesses to present me with ad impressions, because the advertisers are paying them. I think what Buffet is saying is that there are (at least) two different markets for news: people who want a distraction, and people who want insightful journalism. Free/online news is perfect for the first market, but unsustainable for the second. I'm part of the second market, which is why I subscribe to weekly magazines. I find that articles get better if the writers have a few days to think about the issues, rather than a few seconds.
I once heard a poet say that she loved poetry because it was the one thing that nobody had yet been able to commodify successfully. It's still worth absolutely nothing.
One could argue that people can now take the money that they would have spent on buying commodified music and spend it supporting new/local/independent artists. This argument can be applied across any field that is rendered less expensive by technology. However, I think it is more likely that wages will fall, now that people need less money to satisfy their desires, while still feeling just as content. Back in the 30s and 40s, you needed to have a whole community of local artists to sustain any sort of access to culture. Now all you need is a cheap smartphone or laptop. I'm no luddite, but technology is not a one-way road toward a better life.
Yes, Socrates was a lot harder on the politicians than on the artisans: "When I began to talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he was thought wise by many, and wiser still by himself; and I went and tried to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise; and the consequence was that he hated me, and his enmity was shared by several who were present and heard me." That sounds a lot like contemporary politics.
"The great misconception of the democracies is that they can see the active participation of the people only in the form of plebiscites according to the principle of majority. In a democracy the people does not act as a unit but as a complex of unrelated individuals who form themselves into parties... The new Reich is based on the principle that real action of a self-determining people is only possible according to the principle of leadership and following." http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14058/14058-h/14058-h.htm#NATIONAL_SOCIALISM
"At last I went to the artisans, for I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things; and in this I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was. But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets; because they were good workmen they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed their wisdom..." -- Plato, _Apology_
Battery life drops off precipitously once you start adding features. If you don't mind having another device to charge every night, go ahead and get a watch with touchscreen/gps/music/etc. I've seen some of these list battery life as low as 8 hours, making them obviously pointless to wear as an everyday watch. I recently found an old Casio calculator watch that I got in grade school, and it's still showing the correct time. I have never changed the battery.
I apologize for my poorly-worded joke. A literal interpretation of the submission's title seems to indicate that any increase in "evidence of football" causes brain damage. This would explain why football fans appear to be brain damaged, since they are frequently exposed to "evidence of football." I don't actually think that there is a problem establishing causation here.
Just because you see a bunch of people who seem brain damaged anywhere there is evidence of football does not mean that you've found "evidence of football causing brain damage."
Funny, I just switched to Quod Libet from iTunes. I was tired of iTunes taking 90 seconds to start and randomly hanging because the 95% of the program I never use was bogging down the 5% that I do use. Being Apple-free at the office is starting to feel as nice as being Microsoft-free at home.
"Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser -- in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough."
The Family Research Council, led by Tony Perkins, is also involved. "In a new Star Wars game, the biggest threat to the empire may be homosexual activists!" said Perkins.
The Empire is the BAD GUYS, which makes "homosexual activists" the GOOD GUYS, Perkins a SITH LORD, and his statement hilariously apt.
If there are roads to these locations, pay a neighborhood kid to ride his bike out and take a picture. Alternatively, put a camera on a carrier pigeon or some other type of capable bird. I'm sure you could also train a dog to walk to a certain location with a view.
Ernst & Young has developed software which identifies potential corporate criminals by inferring their mental state from their electronic communications. They are literally policing employees' thoughts: using their mental states to flag them as criminal suspects. Here's an article about it from the Economist: http://www.economist.com/node/21547833
Slashdot Mirror
Will the Mars colony depend upon re-supply missions from Earth, or will it be able to sustain itself (and replicate itself) indefinitely? If it is not self-sufficient, which elements must be re-supplied from Earth?
Which components of the mission depend entirely on existing, proven technology, and which components require new technology to be developed?
University professors teach Congolese youths how to make beats.
I thought they meant "Gamera vs. Barugon," where the giant turtle-monster Gamera smashes all sorts of things, including most of Osaka.
Regulations like these enable businesses to have more productive employees without having to pay them more. We can pay workers enough to afford good food, or we can have the government artificially increase the price of bad food so that good food is cheapest. The poor will then be forced to divert some of their income from other areas (e.g. education, clothing, healthcare) to food, since there will be no cheaper options. In the words of Chesterton: "Without the trouble of adding twopence to her wages, he has added twopenny-worth to her food. In short, she has the holy satisfaction of being worth more without being paid more."
I hear that in its next flight it's going to cross the Pacific, via the Bering Strait.
Yeah, this was over-hyped, but a solar-powered airplane is still pretty darn cool.
It's not about the social costs of healthcare -- it's about the benefits of a healthier workforce to the employers. By lobbying the government to outlaw obesity, they are getting higher productivity per worker at no cost.
"An employer, let us say, pays a seamstress twopence a day, and she does not seem to thrive on it. So little, perhaps, does she thrive on it that the employer has even some difficulty in thriving upon her. There are only two things that he can do, and the distinction between them cuts the whole social and political world in two. It is a touchstone by which we can—not sometimes, but always—distinguish economic equality from servile social reform. He can give the girl some magnificent sum, such as sixpence a day, to do as she likes with, and trust that her improved health and temper will work for the benefit of his business. Or he may keep her to the original sum of a shilling a week, but earmark each of the pennies to be used or not to be used for a particular purpose. If she must not spend this penny on a bunch of violets, or that penny on a novelette, or the other penny on a toy for some baby, it is possible that she will concentrate her expenditure more upon physical necessities, and so become, from the employer's point of view, a more efficient person. Without the trouble of adding twopence to her wages, he has added twopenny-worth to her food. In short, she has the holy satisfaction of being worth more without being paid more.
This Capitalist is an ingenious person, and has many polished characteristics; but I think the most singular thing about him is his staggering lack of shame. Neither the hour of death nor the day of reckoning, neither the tent of exile nor the house of mourning, neither chivalry nor patriotism, neither womanhood nor widowhood, is safe at this supreme moment from his dirty little expedient of dieting the slave."
--G. K. Chesterton, _Utopia of Usurers_
For most people, getting ahead takes hard work. It's a lot easier to seek out entertainment than the knowledge and skills required to get ahead. This article seems to be right in line with what most people would expect.
That's why I spend all of my free time reading important news on Slashdot instead of wasting time on unproductive digital entertainment.
I get all of my news from weekly magazines: The Economist, The New Yorker, and The New York Review of Books. They actually report on things that are important (that is, things that I consider important), because I am paying them. Free online news exploits my psychological weaknesses to present me with ad impressions, because the advertisers are paying them. I think what Buffet is saying is that there are (at least) two different markets for news: people who want a distraction, and people who want insightful journalism. Free/online news is perfect for the first market, but unsustainable for the second. I'm part of the second market, which is why I subscribe to weekly magazines. I find that articles get better if the writers have a few days to think about the issues, rather than a few seconds.
Anyone else think it's pretty cool that we've reached a point in history where we have to start seriously talking about property rights on the moon?
I once heard a poet say that she loved poetry because it was the one thing that nobody had yet been able to commodify successfully. It's still worth absolutely nothing.
One could argue that people can now take the money that they would have spent on buying commodified music and spend it supporting new/local/independent artists. This argument can be applied across any field that is rendered less expensive by technology. However, I think it is more likely that wages will fall, now that people need less money to satisfy their desires, while still feeling just as content. Back in the 30s and 40s, you needed to have a whole community of local artists to sustain any sort of access to culture. Now all you need is a cheap smartphone or laptop. I'm no luddite, but technology is not a one-way road toward a better life.
Yes, Socrates was a lot harder on the politicians than on the artisans:
"When I began to talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he was thought wise by many, and wiser still by himself; and I went and tried to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise; and the consequence was that he hated me, and his enmity was shared by several who were present and heard me."
That sounds a lot like contemporary politics.
"The great misconception of the democracies is that they can see the active participation of the people only in the form of plebiscites according to the principle of majority. In a democracy the people does not act as a unit but as a complex of unrelated individuals who form themselves into parties ... The new Reich is based on the principle that real action of a self-determining people is only possible according to the principle of leadership and following."
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14058/14058-h/14058-h.htm#NATIONAL_SOCIALISM
Godwin's Law strikes again.
"At last I went to the artisans, for I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things; and in this I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was. But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets; because they were good workmen they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed their wisdom..." -- Plato, _Apology_
Battery life drops off precipitously once you start adding features. If you don't mind having another device to charge every night, go ahead and get a watch with touchscreen/gps/music/etc. I've seen some of these list battery life as low as 8 hours, making them obviously pointless to wear as an everyday watch. I recently found an old Casio calculator watch that I got in grade school, and it's still showing the correct time. I have never changed the battery.
No, I'm joking.
I apologize for my poorly-worded joke. A literal interpretation of the submission's title seems to indicate that any increase in "evidence of football" causes brain damage. This would explain why football fans appear to be brain damaged, since they are frequently exposed to "evidence of football." I don't actually think that there is a problem establishing causation here.
Just because you see a bunch of people who seem brain damaged anywhere there is evidence of football does not mean that you've found "evidence of football causing brain damage."
Funny, I just switched to Quod Libet from iTunes. I was tired of iTunes taking 90 seconds to start and randomly hanging because the 95% of the program I never use was bogging down the 5% that I do use. Being Apple-free at the office is starting to feel as nice as being Microsoft-free at home.
"Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser -- in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough."
--Abraham Lincoln
The Family Research Council, led by Tony Perkins, is also involved. "In a new Star Wars game, the biggest threat to the empire may be homosexual activists!" said Perkins.
The Empire is the BAD GUYS, which makes "homosexual activists" the GOOD GUYS, Perkins a SITH LORD, and his statement hilariously apt.
If there are roads to these locations, pay a neighborhood kid to ride his bike out and take a picture. Alternatively, put a camera on a carrier pigeon or some other type of capable bird. I'm sure you could also train a dog to walk to a certain location with a view.
Ernst & Young has developed software which identifies potential corporate criminals by inferring their mental state from their electronic communications. They are literally policing employees' thoughts: using their mental states to flag them as criminal suspects. Here's an article about it from the Economist: http://www.economist.com/node/21547833