The retailer is not restricted from selling at a lower price, they are just not allowed to advertise the lower price. Big difference.
It still seems pretty rotten to me, and I don't understand how they get away with it. The intent is to present to the consumer a fixed price, and not every consumer will know about the non-advertised price. They are clearly trying to reduce competitive pricing.
Your solution to anti-competitve behavior is to kill off one of the few competitors to Amazon? Fine them based on damages plus a penalty, and make them play nice. If the behavior is really egregious, then somebody should go to jail, too. This never seems to happen for companies like Apple.
At the same time GUI designers have done a bad job being unambiguous enough in their communications to communicate effectively. Both projects suffered horribly for these mistakes and they won't likely be repeated but it would have been a lot better for everyone if they hadn't.
The GUI designers didn't give a shit, and they won't give a shit in the future. As a freeloading user, I can't say I fully blame them, unless they are paid to care. Sure, it would have been nice if they cared about backwards compatibility or user concerns, but that's not as fun as designing new stuff, now is it?
I'm pretty sure Card is the type of homophobe who hates The Gay because he has it in himself, and wants to deny it as vehemently as possible so as to avoid suspicion.
Seems that way to me too. One thing you forgot to mention was that the kids were naked.
The idea appeared to be "this boundary thing, it's unclear" and it gets it across pretty damn well. Jerk.
We knew that already, Anonymous Idiot. The question is why it is unclear, and if our models say that it should be unclear.
What does the wind have to do with anything in the island analogy, other than the real problem has a solar wind? There's no reason given why it should be considered a useful detector in the island analogy, yet it's clear in the real problem that there are two opposing winds, along with a magnetic field that has no comparison in the island analogy.
I doubt Sid had much creative input into some of the recent stuff with his name on it. I can't begrudge him making a few bucks off his name that way, either.
I haven't been to a theater in years, but I personally experienced shithead behavior twice. Once a group of teenagers clearly were more interested in talking than watching the movie. Some dude's girlfriend eventually asked them to be quiet and they left. The other time some stupid girl's cell phone rang, and she sat there talking for about 30-60 seconds, mentioning that she was in the theater and couldn't talk, all while talking loud enough for the entire theater to hear her.
You complain about sameness but watch the same classics over and over again? Why is Blade Runner any better than Inception? You've got a serious case of nostalgia and classics filter going on, forgetting all the not-so-memorable films that were out at the same time.
The CNN woman that moderated the debate between Romney and Obama outright lied in the middle of the debate to protect Obama, a week later she admitted to lying, she was congratulated as a hero in CNN.
ROMNEY: I -- I think interesting the president just said something which -- which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror. [..] I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.
[..]
CROWLEY: He -- he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.
[..]
And here is the transcript from Obama's Rose Garden remarks on September 12, the day after the attack:
"Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe," he said. "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."
[..]
But, as to the original accusation from the conservative critics that Obama never mentioned "acts of terror" until weeks after the attack, they were wrong. Crowley was right.
This analogy is terrible. Is the island generating its own wind, apart from an incoming wind? Is it generating a field that would interact with those winds? If you want to understand what is going on, then you need appropriate models, not toy analogies.
Pearl Jam's album "Ten" was amazing. Pretty much everything after that was shit, though, and unfortunately they had so much inertia it ended up getting airplay.
It was a really good game, but it sold poorly. In the end, I think its complexity ended up hurting it. It's still worth a playthrough for anybody that hasn't experienced it (I ended up playing it myself just a few years ago, even though the game came out in 1999).
As a woman, it's friday at down here and for work today I am wearing dark jeans, high top sneakers, a Dr Who T-shirt, I had short (though coloured) hair and am wearing no make up. I don't consider myself a tom boy and get flirted with plenty. I'm also on the cuddly side as far as size goes.
And you're also reading and commenting on Slashdot. In other words, you're not the typical woman.
And why should being a free software develooper be such a difficult job when you don't need to grow a thick skin to be a proprietary software developer?
Unless you're writing that proprietary software for yourself in isolation, it helps a lot to have a thick skin. If you release it to the public, it will receive harsh criticism. If you work with peers, sooner or later somebody is going to criticize something you've worked on.
I will say that at least at work you're paid to put up with bullshit. On the other hand, developing free software can be good resume filler and experience, along with a sense of accomplishment if people like your stuff.
Legal liability. Those who fear being blamed for misuse of their public Wi-Fi signals are said to be protected under a "safe harbor" doctrine akin to that protecting Internet service providers. In other words, they're likely not liable for the mischief of porn purveyors or music pirates.
That won't be much comfort when law enforcement executes a search warrant and seizes my network equipment and computers. They won't do it to big-name ISPs, but they'll do it to Joe Blow homeowner.
So you don't want to do any work yourself to see if my points were correct.
Of course not. You made the claim, you back it up. What bizarre debate world do you live in that others have to back up your claims?
You saw my reply to hondo77, and all you remember was a referrence to GDP, when that post was a rebuttal to using a GDP argument (by a linked site, not by hondo77 himself).
First, you are factually wrong, embarrassingly so. I explicitly quoted the parts that weren't about your argument with hondo77 and GDP.
You don't think I'm right, but wouldn't care even if I am, because you don't think I am.
This is a strawman. I made no comment about your being right or wrong in your argument with hondo77 regarding taxes and GDP. I'm focused on what I said, which is about the housing bubble.
So now that we've clarified you lack of comprehension and your robust willful ignorance, let's get to business.
Now that we clarified your lack of comprehension and robust willful ignorance, let's see just how much "business" you get to.
I didn't "give Bush credit for a bubble". [..] The fact that a real estate bubble happened during that same time has no bearing on that definition.
You at least agree that Bush was six years into his presidency while the real estate bubble grew. Do you contend that the real estate bubble was not a significant factor in the economic growth?
You already have posted that the deregulation of the investment banking happened under Clinton. So now I'm at a loss as to what you would have rather Bush had done to prevent the bubble you focus on so much.
Do what Clinton didn't, and regulate. Of course Bush wouldn't do that, so I'm at a loss as to what you think Bush actually said or did to prevent the bubble.
Since you don't like that he grew the economy
Another strawman.
apparently you wish he had done things that would have kept the economy down, with fewer people working, with fewer companies starting or expanding, with people who do have jobs getting fewer hours, and those same people getting their benefits cut. That would have surely prevented the bubble.
Your argument is inconsistent. We can't prevent the bubble because that would hurt the economy. So instead we'll let the bubble grow until it pops and hurts the economy.
You would be happy then since with a horrible economy, people who can't afford house payments won't buy a house, so a housing bubble will be avoided.
Another strawman. The problem was people who really couldn't afford houses were being sold them, and it was due to a lack of oversight and regulations. I'd argue for steady growth that doesn't blow up in your face rather than just pretending that an unbridled free market is the best option.
Now, as to your other ignorant claim, whether Bush warned about the bubble, and when, I don't feel like coddling you anymore, so go google it yourself.
In other words, you'd rather build up ad hominen strawmen and knock them down instead of doing the one thing that would win you the argument, which is to back up your claim. You're not half as clever as you think you are, and lack integrity as well.
If the rapidity of action is your sole measure of government health, then it would seem that a move towards greater fascism, lesser rights for workers/property owners, more stifling of dissenting voices and a court system which always sides with government will, in your eyes, constitute the improvements that reinvigorates a nation.
This was modded down, but it accurately describes China. Yeah, I know all you apologists point to failings in the US system, but you're comparing night and day. China is a single party country with absolute power that controls the courts and media. If you want to get a building built in record time with no disputes allowed, China is the place to do it, and it isn't because of "freeflowing trade".
So cheap labor in Detroit was outsourced to other countries, the same as happened in other countries. How is China going to be different as global capitalism keeps on chasing slave wages around the world?
You hate them because you don't agree with them. Period.
I disagree with them because I think they are stupid and wrong. Period.
See my response to hondo77 that shows you are wrong.
Most of that post is a response to an argument hondo77 made, not me, regarding tax revenues and GDP. What I said was, "You're trying to give credit to Bush for the boom of a bubble while withholding the blame for the inevitable collapse."
Now with regards to Bush and the bubble, you made the following statements:
[..] the real estate bubble bursting in 2006, causing the economic freefall in 2008. Bush warned about the real estate bubble, and was shouted down by Democrats such as Barney Frank claiming there was no problem at all in the market. [..] Bush warned about it and tried to resolve the issue before it came to such a dramatic end.
and in this post:
[..] Bush warned about the effect of it, and tried to reform the situation before it came to "the inevitable collapse".
First, cite your evidence of just what Bush said and did.
Second, even if you are correct (which I doubt), warning of a problem near the height of a bubble you helped created does not absolve you from it's collapse. And it was inevitable. The bad loans were already in play, that's why it was a bubble.
Honestly, it's like you don't even try to figure out what others say, and just have a reply waiting to roll off your fingertips whenever someone states something you don't like.
Which is complete bullshit, because I replied specifically to what you said, and I've reiterated it here. You gave Bush credit for a bubble he helped create, and tried to let him off the hook for the downsides.
Then find actual facts, not opinion pieces from sites you agree with, and see if the facts back my point.
I eagerly await your actual facts of what Bush said and did to mitigate the disaster that built on his watch. In the meantime, the Frontline video I linked to wasn't some fluff "opinion piece", it was investigative journalism that implicated both parties and contained numerable facts. You could, of course, have verified this yourself by watching the video or at least reading some of the synopsis. If you have a serious dispute with it then be specific.
This is the method I use when I start debating topics. If I haven't looked at the evidence and interpretations others give, how can I possibly think I have the correct knowledge and interpretation?
So you'll be watching the Frontline video then? You will be providing solid evidence for Bush's words and actions on the housing bubble?
(c'mon.. how many people really needed Microsoft Office suite? So.. we set OpenOffice and made them think some of them had MS Office.. LOL)
I don't see how that could work without people being aware something is going on, because you always get those pesky conversion warnings/decisions when opening a Microsoft format in OpenOffice.
After all that license reclaiming and monitoring how much we spent on travel, repairs, etc.. we saved over 75,000$/year easily. It's definitely not that impressive but when you considering that's for a small org covering the geographic distance of a US state.. that's decent enough..
You're right, it isn't that impressive. It works out to $250 per machine, going by your numbers. The salaries of the people attached to these machines makes your efforts look like penny-pinching.
Wait one minute here... But you can't really catch the terrorists. Or did I miss something with the wankers who hit the Boston Marathon? Or how about that guy that decided to become a nutter and butcher a solider in London? Surveillance *really* worked there didn't!
I don't support this unconstitutional dragnet of spying on Americans, but your logic is flawed. Just because 100% of terrorist acts aren't prevented doesn't mean surveillance is ineffective. Terrorists plots have been broken up, and would-be terrorists have been convicted. Considering the scale of the attack of 9/11, I'd say the record since then has been pretty good.
Slashdot Mirror
The retailer is not restricted from selling at a lower price, they are just not allowed to advertise the lower price. Big difference.
It still seems pretty rotten to me, and I don't understand how they get away with it. The intent is to present to the consumer a fixed price, and not every consumer will know about the non-advertised price. They are clearly trying to reduce competitive pricing.
Your solution to anti-competitve behavior is to kill off one of the few competitors to Amazon? Fine them based on damages plus a penalty, and make them play nice. If the behavior is really egregious, then somebody should go to jail, too. This never seems to happen for companies like Apple.
At the same time GUI designers have done a bad job being unambiguous enough in their communications to communicate effectively. Both projects suffered horribly for these mistakes and they won't likely be repeated but it would have been a lot better for everyone if they hadn't.
The GUI designers didn't give a shit, and they won't give a shit in the future. As a freeloading user, I can't say I fully blame them, unless they are paid to care. Sure, it would have been nice if they cared about backwards compatibility or user concerns, but that's not as fun as designing new stuff, now is it?
I'm pretty sure Card is the type of homophobe who hates The Gay because he has it in himself, and wants to deny it as vehemently as possible so as to avoid suspicion.
Seems that way to me too. One thing you forgot to mention was that the kids were naked.
The idea appeared to be "this boundary thing, it's unclear" and it gets it across pretty damn well. Jerk.
We knew that already, Anonymous Idiot. The question is why it is unclear, and if our models say that it should be unclear.
What does the wind have to do with anything in the island analogy, other than the real problem has a solar wind? There's no reason given why it should be considered a useful detector in the island analogy, yet it's clear in the real problem that there are two opposing winds, along with a magnetic field that has no comparison in the island analogy.
I doubt Sid had much creative input into some of the recent stuff with his name on it. I can't begrudge him making a few bucks off his name that way, either.
It's kind of sleazy.
But I'm digressing...
That tends to happen as you get older ;)
Come on, the last Star Wars film was decent.
I haven't been to a theater in years, but I personally experienced shithead behavior twice. Once a group of teenagers clearly were more interested in talking than watching the movie. Some dude's girlfriend eventually asked them to be quiet and they left. The other time some stupid girl's cell phone rang, and she sat there talking for about 30-60 seconds, mentioning that she was in the theater and couldn't talk, all while talking loud enough for the entire theater to hear her.
This was in a reasonably sized city.
You complain about sameness but watch the same classics over and over again? Why is Blade Runner any better than Inception? You've got a serious case of nostalgia and classics filter going on, forgetting all the not-so-memorable films that were out at the same time.
The CNN woman that moderated the debate between Romney and Obama outright lied in the middle of the debate to protect Obama, a week later she admitted to lying, she was congratulated as a hero in CNN.
Or are you lying or mistaken? From CNN:
ROMNEY: I -- I think interesting the president just said something which -- which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror. [..] I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.
[..]
CROWLEY: He -- he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.
[..]
And here is the transcript from Obama's Rose Garden remarks on September 12, the day after the attack:
"Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe," he said. "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."
[..]
But, as to the original accusation from the conservative critics that Obama never mentioned "acts of terror" until weeks after the attack, they were wrong. Crowley was right.
This analogy is terrible. Is the island generating its own wind, apart from an incoming wind? Is it generating a field that would interact with those winds? If you want to understand what is going on, then you need appropriate models, not toy analogies.
Pearl Jam's album "Ten" was amazing. Pretty much everything after that was shit, though, and unfortunately they had so much inertia it ended up getting airplay.
It was a really good game, but it sold poorly. In the end, I think its complexity ended up hurting it. It's still worth a playthrough for anybody that hasn't experienced it (I ended up playing it myself just a few years ago, even though the game came out in 1999).
Its bandwidth is mostly used by people streaming or downloading videos of people dancing or riding horses.
I didn't know horses could dance. No wonder you get so many downloads.
Sex must be banned!
Sex is ok, but only with your single spouse for life, in the missionary position, with the lights off at night under the covers, without a condom.
As a woman, it's friday at down here and for work today I am wearing dark jeans, high top sneakers, a Dr Who T-shirt, I had short (though coloured) hair and am wearing no make up. I don't consider myself a tom boy and get flirted with plenty. I'm also on the cuddly side as far as size goes.
And you're also reading and commenting on Slashdot. In other words, you're not the typical woman.
And why should being a free software develooper be such a difficult job when you don't need to grow a thick skin to be a proprietary software developer?
Unless you're writing that proprietary software for yourself in isolation, it helps a lot to have a thick skin. If you release it to the public, it will receive harsh criticism. If you work with peers, sooner or later somebody is going to criticize something you've worked on.
I will say that at least at work you're paid to put up with bullshit. On the other hand, developing free software can be good resume filler and experience, along with a sense of accomplishment if people like your stuff.
Legal liability. Those who fear being blamed for misuse of their public Wi-Fi signals are said to be protected under a "safe harbor" doctrine akin to that protecting Internet service providers. In other words, they're likely not liable for the mischief of porn purveyors or music pirates.
That won't be much comfort when law enforcement executes a search warrant and seizes my network equipment and computers. They won't do it to big-name ISPs, but they'll do it to Joe Blow homeowner.
So you don't want to do any work yourself to see if my points were correct.
Of course not. You made the claim, you back it up. What bizarre debate world do you live in that others have to back up your claims?
You saw my reply to hondo77, and all you remember was a referrence to GDP, when that post was a rebuttal to using a GDP argument (by a linked site, not by hondo77 himself).
First, you are factually wrong, embarrassingly so. I explicitly quoted the parts that weren't about your argument with hondo77 and GDP.
You don't think I'm right, but wouldn't care even if I am, because you don't think I am.
This is a strawman. I made no comment about your being right or wrong in your argument with hondo77 regarding taxes and GDP. I'm focused on what I said, which is about the housing bubble.
So now that we've clarified you lack of comprehension and your robust willful ignorance, let's get to business.
Now that we clarified your lack of comprehension and robust willful ignorance, let's see just how much "business" you get to.
I didn't "give Bush credit for a bubble". [..] The fact that a real estate bubble happened during that same time has no bearing on that definition.
You at least agree that Bush was six years into his presidency while the real estate bubble grew. Do you contend that the real estate bubble was not a significant factor in the economic growth?
You already have posted that the deregulation of the investment banking happened under Clinton. So now I'm at a loss as to what you would have rather Bush had done to prevent the bubble you focus on so much.
Do what Clinton didn't, and regulate. Of course Bush wouldn't do that, so I'm at a loss as to what you think Bush actually said or did to prevent the bubble.
Since you don't like that he grew the economy
Another strawman.
apparently you wish he had done things that would have kept the economy down, with fewer people working, with fewer companies starting or expanding, with people who do have jobs getting fewer hours, and those same people getting their benefits cut. That would have surely prevented the bubble.
Your argument is inconsistent. We can't prevent the bubble because that would hurt the economy. So instead we'll let the bubble grow until it pops and hurts the economy.
You would be happy then since with a horrible economy, people who can't afford house payments won't buy a house, so a housing bubble will be avoided.
Another strawman. The problem was people who really couldn't afford houses were being sold them, and it was due to a lack of oversight and regulations. I'd argue for steady growth that doesn't blow up in your face rather than just pretending that an unbridled free market is the best option.
Now, as to your other ignorant claim, whether Bush warned about the bubble, and when, I don't feel like coddling you anymore, so go google it yourself.
In other words, you'd rather build up ad hominen strawmen and knock them down instead of doing the one thing that would win you the argument, which is to back up your claim. You're not half as clever as you think you are, and lack integrity as well.
If the rapidity of action is your sole measure of government health, then it would seem that a move towards greater fascism, lesser rights for workers/property owners, more stifling of dissenting voices and a court system which always sides with government will, in your eyes, constitute the improvements that reinvigorates a nation.
This was modded down, but it accurately describes China. Yeah, I know all you apologists point to failings in the US system, but you're comparing night and day. China is a single party country with absolute power that controls the courts and media. If you want to get a building built in record time with no disputes allowed, China is the place to do it, and it isn't because of "freeflowing trade".
So cheap labor in Detroit was outsourced to other countries, the same as happened in other countries. How is China going to be different as global capitalism keeps on chasing slave wages around the world?
You hate them because you don't agree with them. Period.
I disagree with them because I think they are stupid and wrong. Period.
See my response to hondo77 that shows you are wrong.
Most of that post is a response to an argument hondo77 made, not me, regarding tax revenues and GDP. What I said was, "You're trying to give credit to Bush for the boom of a bubble while withholding the blame for the inevitable collapse."
Now with regards to Bush and the bubble, you made the following statements:
[..] the real estate bubble bursting in 2006, causing the economic freefall in 2008. Bush warned about the real estate bubble, and was shouted down by Democrats such as Barney Frank claiming there was no problem at all in the market. [..] Bush warned about it and tried to resolve the issue before it came to such a dramatic end.
and in this post:
[..] Bush warned about the effect of it, and tried to reform the situation before it came to "the inevitable collapse".
First, cite your evidence of just what Bush said and did.
Second, even if you are correct (which I doubt), warning of a problem near the height of a bubble you helped created does not absolve you from it's collapse. And it was inevitable. The bad loans were already in play, that's why it was a bubble.
Honestly, it's like you don't even try to figure out what others say, and just have a reply waiting to roll off your fingertips whenever someone states something you don't like.
Which is complete bullshit, because I replied specifically to what you said, and I've reiterated it here. You gave Bush credit for a bubble he helped create, and tried to let him off the hook for the downsides.
Then find actual facts, not opinion pieces from sites you agree with, and see if the facts back my point.
I eagerly await your actual facts of what Bush said and did to mitigate the disaster that built on his watch. In the meantime, the Frontline video I linked to wasn't some fluff "opinion piece", it was investigative journalism that implicated both parties and contained numerable facts. You could, of course, have verified this yourself by watching the video or at least reading some of the synopsis. If you have a serious dispute with it then be specific.
This is the method I use when I start debating topics. If I haven't looked at the evidence and interpretations others give, how can I possibly think I have the correct knowledge and interpretation?
So you'll be watching the Frontline video then? You will be providing solid evidence for Bush's words and actions on the housing bubble?
(c'mon.. how many people really needed Microsoft Office suite? So.. we set OpenOffice and made them think some of them had MS Office.. LOL)
I don't see how that could work without people being aware something is going on, because you always get those pesky conversion warnings/decisions when opening a Microsoft format in OpenOffice.
After all that license reclaiming and monitoring how much we spent on travel, repairs, etc.. we saved over 75,000$/year easily. It's definitely not that impressive but when you considering that's for a small org covering the geographic distance of a US state.. that's decent enough..
You're right, it isn't that impressive. It works out to $250 per machine, going by your numbers. The salaries of the people attached to these machines makes your efforts look like penny-pinching.
Wait one minute here... But you can't really catch the terrorists. Or did I miss something with the wankers who hit the Boston Marathon? Or how about that guy that decided to become a nutter and butcher a solider in London? Surveillance *really* worked there didn't!
I don't support this unconstitutional dragnet of spying on Americans, but your logic is flawed. Just because 100% of terrorist acts aren't prevented doesn't mean surveillance is ineffective. Terrorists plots have been broken up, and would-be terrorists have been convicted. Considering the scale of the attack of 9/11, I'd say the record since then has been pretty good.