No. A kid who's never had an injection might have AIDS, but that doesn't mean I can't stick a needle in you and give you AIDS. Of course, the vaccine / autism link HAS been "blown away", but not by your reasoning:) There was never any data to support a link in the first place. The conclusive proof came when we started taking mercury out of vaccines and didn't see any corresponding drop in autism rates. Of course, the lunatics just started moving the goalposts, but any semi-rational objection became impossible at that point.
lol. I don't think you can even see reality from where you're sitting:)
I'll tell you what, you point to the libertarian argument that supports your position, (because I know you haven't come up with any original arguments of your own) and I'll debunk it for you. Sound fair?
The fact that you think I'm a libertarian is a pretty bad start on your part. What do you do for an encore - call me a teabagger?
Sorry, I'm not playing this game. You would have to have some grounding in reality before we could have any sort of productive discussion. Thanks for the offer, though. Take care.
I don't see how Starbucks "loses" anything. The guy didn't win
Really? Damn:p Guess I wasn't paying attention.
Starbucks still loses since they have to pay their lawyers, but yea, not as much. The point was that high payouts encourage frivolous lawsuits, even if they don't succeed as often as I thought.
Like the lady who sued McDonalds after coffee spilled on her legs and gave her second-degree burns. It was discovered that McDonalds was in violation of state law because they had the coffee set above 150 degrees. i.e. Dangerous. Awarding the lady $30,000 in damages would have taught McDonalds nothing. So the court also applied a million dollar fine on top of it.
As I said - I have no problem with fines, I just don't think they should be paid to the person bringing the lawsuit. Give them enough to offset the harm that was caused, and put the rest into public funds.
Perhaps but then you'd have *politicians* trolling for dollars instead.
You mean politicians bringing lawsuits? I doubt it. It doesn't happen here, anyway. Maybe if you made all the payouts go to one specific department, then yeah, I could see the politicians associated with that area trying to significantly increase their budgets. But if it goes into the general budget, the overall impact on any one politician is too small for them to bother. Hell, you could just funnel every penny into paying off your massive debt:) Kill two birds with one stone kind of thing.
Yep, both you and "theaveng" are in the US, so as much as I appreciate the responses, they don't help me any:) We have various rewards cards here, too, but the rates are generally crap. I can't even get the Amazon Visa!
Nope. My position is that you're engaging in historical revisionism. I can point out that you're wrong about the effect of unfettered capitalism on the rise of the US as a global superpower, without encouraging or discouraging such a state of affairs in the present.
Not just in the US. My understanding is that Germany has remained competitive in manufacturing by investing heavily in robotics. Manufacturing may return to the west but jobs won't be.
Most of the "1st world" nations are doing the same. When I was younger, I always though this was a good thing. I figured that the decreased need for people to work menial jobs would result in a higher level of overall wealth, which would result in more people getting better educations and working in science and technology to help expand our understanding of the universe. Unfortunately, much of that naivete has worn off. What I see now is a future with the majority of people sitting on their couch, fat, dumb, and lazy, collecting welfare checks and always bitching and demanding more, while a small portion of the population struggles to try and make things better. Growing up really sucks sometimes.
You don't understand the concept of punitive damages do you? If you only fined a company 30,000 then it would just continue abusing workers with dangerous conditions. (As was the case with 1970s Ford when they decided it was cheaper to pay victims of blowing-up Pinto cars, rather than fix the flaw.) So courts award 30,000 actual damage PLUS the 10,000,000 punishment to make the company "hurt" and want to improve itself.
Which is all fine and good, except it encourages people to sue for no reason whatsoever, and hurts companies for situations which aren't their fault. Classic example being the twit who supposedly crushed his nuts with a Starbucks toilet seat.
There are other ways to legislate for worker rights, without needing such ridiculously high payouts. Here in Canada, the safety record of most companies is excellent, yet we have relatively low limits on how much a plaintiff can receive for personal injury lawsuits. Companies can be fined by the government for violations of safety regulations without needing to hand over 20 bazillion dollars to some poor data-entry drone whose slave-driver bosses made her brake a fingernail.
These ideas did not help make America great. They helped make robber barons rich and delayed reduced the greatness we could have achieved without robber barons leaching off all the wealth.
lol. Right. Go on, pull the other one!
Funny thing is, these are the same arguments which were being made during the Glorious Soviet Era, explaining why the US couldn't possibly hope to compete with the Workers Paradise. It was ridiculous then, and it's ridiculous now - the only difference is that back then people had the excuse of naivete to justify buying into it. These days, there's really no excuse. It's just willful ignorance.
Um. A design flaw would be something which limits the usability of the system by impacting performance or service delivery, or creates opportunities for the service to be abused/exploited. "Encouraging users to click a link" is certainly not a design flaw. By the same logic, selling stuff door-to-door has a "massive design flaw" because it encourages people to open their door to strangers. And credit cards have a "massive design flaw" because they encourage people to sign their names all over the place.
And only in America is saying, "hey, a little bit of socialism ain't so bad" is equated with "DOWN WITH CAPITALISM FASCIST ILLUMINATI!"
Really? I've been there lots of times, and never gotten that reaction. Are we talking about the same America here? Northern Hemisphere? Just south of Canada?
As for your reasoning, no. The very fact that PayPal even exists shows that there is demand for something like this.
Bud, if the banks thought they could put paypal out of business and rake in those kinds of profits themselves, they'd be all over it. I've yet to meet a banker who isn't interest in increasing revenues by $3 billion per year.
Really? Where do you live? I've never seen those kinds of rebates around here. I've just got a "cashback" card which gets me about $150 - $200 annually. Although I do have a gas CC which gets me 2 cents off every liter (about 2% with the current prices).
Also, unfortunately, I'm not allowed to collect rebates or points for business related expenses. One of the downsides of being a government employee.
Then their TOS are illegal. I mean, I'm not sure why you would accept a contract which says that they have the right to rob you, but that's irrelevant - you can still sue them and win.
Ah, yes, its those horrible Fat Cats and their Reptilian Overlords. Down with Capitalism! Free love and free weed are a human right!
I mean, it couldn't be just a case of there being very little demand for wire transfers due to the pervasiveness of credit cards, resulting in higher fees on a per-transfer basis. No, that's FAR too unlikely.
Wait a second. He told you to mellow out and that you were coming across like an arrogant prick and you agreed with him? Clearly you have no idea how the Internet works. The correct response in that situation is "UP YOURS PAL! I'M GONNA FIND YOU AND BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!!!!!111".
Ah, but I'm using reverse psychology. Agreeing is the new disagreeing. He's probably PISSED right now;)
I understood what you were saying, which is why I think you're retarded. There is no manufacturer anywhere in the world that is expected to "make an effort to restrict their audience to the technically skilled". Your blind hatred of MS and your petulant demands are completely irrelevant, since you've demonstrated absolutely no reason why such an exception should be made.
I'm sorry that you found my previous comment offensive - I was merely trying to be helpful. Perhaps the product I linked to required too much "technical proficiency" for your taste - let me try again.
When Microsoft touts the "Ease of Use" of their product, clearly they're speaking to the portion of the population with an IQ higher than room temperature. Apparently you're not part of their target demographic. May I offer an alternative?
I can't believe you took the time to write that much.
Point I was making: what you're calling negligence, isn't. If your house gets broken into, you don't get to sue the lock manufacturer because tumblers are so easy to pick. If your car breaks down because you never change the oil, you don't get to sue Ford. If you can't program your VCR clock because you're an idiot, you don't get to sue RCA. And if you fail to grasp these simple concepts, don't expect to be taken seriously.
And no, I would never want OS manufacturers to be held to the same standards as the car industry, since this would effectively kill off the Open Source movement.
Slashdot Mirror
It was hell getting a cooking surface in vitro-ceramics.
Gas is more efficient.
Convection oven?
http://reviews.walmart.com/1336/9222614/euro-pro-0-75-cu-ft-convection-oven-with-rotisserie-reviews/reviews.htm
It is a huge joke.
If you're talking about your comment, then yeah, it is. Although you have perfectly demonstrated your own premise - people hate change.
I was going to say the same thing, before I refreshed the page to see if anyone else was being a pedantic jackass :)
Obvious troll is obvious.
No. A kid who's never had an injection might have AIDS, but that doesn't mean I can't stick a needle in you and give you AIDS. Of course, the vaccine / autism link HAS been "blown away", but not by your reasoning :) There was never any data to support a link in the first place. The conclusive proof came when we started taking mercury out of vaccines and didn't see any corresponding drop in autism rates. Of course, the lunatics just started moving the goalposts, but any semi-rational objection became impossible at that point.
Maybe it's those fucking unconstitutional required vaccinations the morons have been experimenting with us for years
*facepalm*
I am sorry that you've managed to breed.
We have already been in the next World War over resources since 9/11. What, you think it was about liberation and terrrrrorrrists?
My god. It's full of stupid!
I listed reasons.
Liar.
But do let's make it clear that *you* are the one arguing from a position of ignorance here.
Nope.
Americans use PayPal .... Make no mistake, there is demand that is not being met.
I rest my case.
Here in the reality based community
lol. I don't think you can even see reality from where you're sitting :)
I'll tell you what, you point to the libertarian argument that supports your position, (because I know you haven't come up with any original arguments of your own) and I'll debunk it for you. Sound fair?
The fact that you think I'm a libertarian is a pretty bad start on your part. What do you do for an encore - call me a teabagger?
Sorry, I'm not playing this game. You would have to have some grounding in reality before we could have any sort of productive discussion. Thanks for the offer, though. Take care.
I don't see how Starbucks "loses" anything. The guy didn't win
Really? Damn :p Guess I wasn't paying attention.
Starbucks still loses since they have to pay their lawyers, but yea, not as much. The point was that high payouts encourage frivolous lawsuits, even if they don't succeed as often as I thought.
Like the lady who sued McDonalds after coffee spilled on her legs and gave her second-degree burns. It was discovered that McDonalds was in violation of state law because they had the coffee set above 150 degrees. i.e. Dangerous. Awarding the lady $30,000 in damages would have taught McDonalds nothing. So the court also applied a million dollar fine on top of it.
As I said - I have no problem with fines, I just don't think they should be paid to the person bringing the lawsuit. Give them enough to offset the harm that was caused, and put the rest into public funds.
Perhaps but then you'd have *politicians* trolling for dollars instead.
You mean politicians bringing lawsuits? I doubt it. It doesn't happen here, anyway. Maybe if you made all the payouts go to one specific department, then yeah, I could see the politicians associated with that area trying to significantly increase their budgets. But if it goes into the general budget, the overall impact on any one politician is too small for them to bother. Hell, you could just funnel every penny into paying off your massive debt :) Kill two birds with one stone kind of thing.
Yep, both you and "theaveng" are in the US, so as much as I appreciate the responses, they don't help me any :) We have various rewards cards here, too, but the rates are generally crap. I can't even get the Amazon Visa!
Nope. My position is that you're engaging in historical revisionism. I can point out that you're wrong about the effect of unfettered capitalism on the rise of the US as a global superpower, without encouraging or discouraging such a state of affairs in the present.
Not just in the US. My understanding is that Germany has remained competitive in manufacturing by investing heavily in robotics. Manufacturing may return to the west but jobs won't be.
Most of the "1st world" nations are doing the same. When I was younger, I always though this was a good thing. I figured that the decreased need for people to work menial jobs would result in a higher level of overall wealth, which would result in more people getting better educations and working in science and technology to help expand our understanding of the universe. Unfortunately, much of that naivete has worn off. What I see now is a future with the majority of people sitting on their couch, fat, dumb, and lazy, collecting welfare checks and always bitching and demanding more, while a small portion of the population struggles to try and make things better. Growing up really sucks sometimes.
You don't understand the concept of punitive damages do you? If you only fined a company 30,000 then it would just continue abusing workers with dangerous conditions. (As was the case with 1970s Ford when they decided it was cheaper to pay victims of blowing-up Pinto cars, rather than fix the flaw.) So courts award 30,000 actual damage PLUS the 10,000,000 punishment to make the company "hurt" and want to improve itself.
Which is all fine and good, except it encourages people to sue for no reason whatsoever, and hurts companies for situations which aren't their fault. Classic example being the twit who supposedly crushed his nuts with a Starbucks toilet seat.
There are other ways to legislate for worker rights, without needing such ridiculously high payouts. Here in Canada, the safety record of most companies is excellent, yet we have relatively low limits on how much a plaintiff can receive for personal injury lawsuits. Companies can be fined by the government for violations of safety regulations without needing to hand over 20 bazillion dollars to some poor data-entry drone whose slave-driver bosses made her brake a fingernail.
These ideas did not help make America great. They helped make robber barons rich and delayed reduced the greatness we could have achieved without robber barons leaching off all the wealth.
lol. Right. Go on, pull the other one!
Funny thing is, these are the same arguments which were being made during the Glorious Soviet Era, explaining why the US couldn't possibly hope to compete with the Workers Paradise. It was ridiculous then, and it's ridiculous now - the only difference is that back then people had the excuse of naivete to justify buying into it. These days, there's really no excuse. It's just willful ignorance.
Um. A design flaw would be something which limits the usability of the system by impacting performance or service delivery, or creates opportunities for the service to be abused/exploited. "Encouraging users to click a link" is certainly not a design flaw. By the same logic, selling stuff door-to-door has a "massive design flaw" because it encourages people to open their door to strangers. And credit cards have a "massive design flaw" because they encourage people to sign their names all over the place.
Seems a bit silly.
Depends on the type. The "cashback" on my main card is paid by the bank, which is probably why it's only 1%.
Why does it matter though? What do I care who pays it, as long as I'm getting a discount?
Um, no. Americans would be all over that shit.
[citation needed]
And only in America is saying, "hey, a little bit of socialism ain't so bad" is equated with "DOWN WITH CAPITALISM FASCIST ILLUMINATI!"
Really? I've been there lots of times, and never gotten that reaction. Are we talking about the same America here? Northern Hemisphere? Just south of Canada?
As for your reasoning, no. The very fact that PayPal even exists shows that there is demand for something like this.
Bud, if the banks thought they could put paypal out of business and rake in those kinds of profits themselves, they'd be all over it. I've yet to meet a banker who isn't interest in increasing revenues by $3 billion per year.
Really? Where do you live? I've never seen those kinds of rebates around here. I've just got a "cashback" card which gets me about $150 - $200 annually. Although I do have a gas CC which gets me 2 cents off every liter (about 2% with the current prices).
Also, unfortunately, I'm not allowed to collect rebates or points for business related expenses. One of the downsides of being a government employee.
Then their TOS are illegal. I mean, I'm not sure why you would accept a contract which says that they have the right to rob you, but that's irrelevant - you can still sue them and win.
Ah, yes, its those horrible Fat Cats and their Reptilian Overlords. Down with Capitalism! Free love and free weed are a human right!
I mean, it couldn't be just a case of there being very little demand for wire transfers due to the pervasiveness of credit cards, resulting in higher fees on a per-transfer basis. No, that's FAR too unlikely.
Interac email money transfer is a phishing attack waiting to happen.
I don't think it works the way you think it works.
The whole system is one giant design flaw and I'm guessing that's half on purpose to prevent you from automating it in any way.
Ok, I'll bite: what's the "giant design flaw"?
Wait a second. He told you to mellow out and that you were coming across like an arrogant prick and you agreed with him? Clearly you have no idea how the Internet works. The correct response in that situation is "UP YOURS PAL! I'M GONNA FIND YOU AND BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!!!!!111".
Ah, but I'm using reverse psychology. Agreeing is the new disagreeing. He's probably PISSED right now ;)
I understood what you were saying, which is why I think you're retarded. There is no manufacturer anywhere in the world that is expected to "make an effort to restrict their audience to the technically skilled". Your blind hatred of MS and your petulant demands are completely irrelevant, since you've demonstrated absolutely no reason why such an exception should be made.
I'm sorry that you found my previous comment offensive - I was merely trying to be helpful. Perhaps the product I linked to required too much "technical proficiency" for your taste - let me try again.
When Microsoft touts the "Ease of Use" of their product, clearly they're speaking to the portion of the population with an IQ higher than room temperature. Apparently you're not part of their target demographic. May I offer an alternative?
I can't believe you took the time to write that much.
Point I was making: what you're calling negligence, isn't. If your house gets broken into, you don't get to sue the lock manufacturer because tumblers are so easy to pick. If your car breaks down because you never change the oil, you don't get to sue Ford. If you can't program your VCR clock because you're an idiot, you don't get to sue RCA. And if you fail to grasp these simple concepts, don't expect to be taken seriously.
And no, I would never want OS manufacturers to be held to the same standards as the car industry, since this would effectively kill off the Open Source movement.