Making a promise to keep serious illegal and/or immoral information confidential is wrong. Breaking that promise is by far the "lessor of two evils".
In an case, the promise made to keep these classes of information confidential does not include a statement like "I promise to keep any war crimes committed by my country or its agents confidential".
What they would like you to believe is that keeping these dirty secrets is the moral thing to do when in reality it is the exact opposite, you have a moral duty to report and denounce these things regardless of any promises that you may have made.
Since the Mac was introduced Apple has been a control freak company (except maybe the period when Jobs was booted out for a while). They require massive marketing to promote their image which is mostly what they provide (i.e. an image). Since we are in a society awash in propaganda, it is unlikely that their near term financial success will change unless a substantial change in society occurs. What you see and value is not what most of those who buy their products see and value. Some of these consumers may have some values in common with you, but they will not see their own duplicity because Apple promotes an image of the contrary. (There are many corporations that do this, for example Nike)
The U.S. has signed the "Outer Space Treaty" which treats the moon like international waters, so nobody has claim to the moon exclusively. Russia (USSR) placed pennants there in 1959.
There are other issues that improve this type of retailers sales
A customer may buy an obscure item related to the popular one because it is both available and discoverable.
A customer may buy the popular items from Amazon because they also have the obscure ones, i.e they usually don't have to search for another source, this precludes competitors.
Amazon becomes the default supplier to most customers because of their ability to both provide diversity and methods for discovery.
Due to increasing concern over identity theft, customers become comfortable with a smaller number of suppliers. I.e. they do not have have to worry about finding something or paying for it safely.
There are some problems with this approach
It gives Amazon immense power to determine whether an item is ever sold because a few companies can become the only viable market. (This may be alleviated with things like Amazon Marketplace if they do not regulate what a seller may sell, especially in regard to media)
Many corporations are cowards and will cave to external pressure to ban something. (I do not know if Amazon ever did this).
Disclaimer: I buy a lot of stuff from Amazon (including from the US, Canada, France and occasionally the UK and Japan)
If anything, its purpose is fear, causing you to fear that things are so bad that this is necessary. They do not want you to feel too safe. The more things they "must" do, the more public paranoia there will be.
from wikipedia, On October 27, 2007, Asia Times quoted Sukhoi's director, Mikhail Pogosyan, "We [India and Russia] will share the funding, engineering and intellectual property [of the new project] in a 50-50 proportion."
While India's role is more financial than technical, this will eventually lead them closer to being able to produce their own fighter. This is as much about acquiring the technical knowhow as acquiring fighters.
The initial 4 Tesla investment rounds yielded 187 million. In May Daimler invested 50 million for 10% indicating a perceived market value of around 500 million. Considering that that was before the 465 million government loan, one could assume that investors are probably very happy with their potential.
A business is an ongoing concern usually worth far more than its raw assets. The original investors all certainly knew that the company would take many years to reach a profit.
They are ripe for a high price buyout, especially if they successfully complete the Model S. The original investors will probably make more than 10x their original investment.
The roadster has a range of 220/244 miles, the model S has a range of 300 miles. They did not just "remove" batteries. Since the car is larger and heavier, intended for a different purpose, they are not really comparable, like a Ferrari and BMW sedan are not really comparable.
Because they were designed for use among pedestrians. When you are on foot you do not want these things anywhere near you. They are obnoxious and dangerous to a pedestrian.
They do not belong on the sidewalk and you would be an idiot to use them on the road. For them to ever become popular, cities would need a redesign.
They cannot be easily moved up or down stairs, they are not acceptable on an elevator unless it is a freight elevator, they are difficult to get in or out of a car, they cannot be brought on public transportation.
Killing off the record companies could possibly be the dawn of a new age with much more diversity. Without the massive inefficiencies of the current music business, how many more musicians can be supported with the same revenue? The fact is, their massive control over the market, requires draconian control and just a few over-promoted stars that blot out the rest. The changes in the music world brought about by technology and the internet has already dramatically increased the access to many artists that we would have had previously.
Killing somebody for trespassing is murder, both morally and legally. If you really are worried about your safety, you would call the police first and only confront them when directly threatened. By purposely confronting them you increase the threat to yourself and anyone with you if they happen to really be dangerous.
On top of this, you're commenting about something that has happened to commercial property, not your private residence.
The trillion dollar car industry was already on its way to implosion. Even if the plan used the money up quickly, this just means that the car industry benefited that much more quickly.
The cost of the advertising is mostly in the fees to the media companies, if the program was canceled, they can quickly make new advertisements.
Medicare is far more efficient than the private health insurance. Rationing, to the extent that it exists at all, is far more rare in this countries than you state. Rationing is actually far worse in the US where the insurance companies do it as a matter of policy. We pay more per capita than any other country but our health care system is one of the worst for a non third world country.
No, this is part of a stimulus plan trying to jump start an economy that has been practically destroyed by laissez-faire capitalist fundamentalists.
Comparison of the Soviet Union to the U.S. is silly. The U.S. has many successful parts of a planned economy, like the highway system, the military. Many other countries have far more success central planned elements, like health care. Some things work better when centrally planned, some things do not. In the U.S., certain political elements exist to make sure that government fails.
And about the whole Soviet Union thing, during a period when the country went through immense turmoil, it raised the standard of living of the average person dramatically, so much so that until seventies, the west was paranoid that the system might actually be better economically. Then it went into stagnation. After the stagnation, the free market fundamentalists put a very large part of their population into poverty. They suffered severe stagnation under central planning fundamentalism and now they suffer under massive poverty under free market fundamentalism.
You assume that children will act as responsibly as adults. They are in school to learn and part of that learning is discipline. If children were always allowed to do whatever they wanted, we would still be in caves or extinct. To incent children in this way would require a draconian punishment/reward system.
Not necessarily, one has to do more giving than taking if your partner has a way out. By making it excessively difficult to leave, allows one partner to be a bully.
The smart meter more closely follows actual cost of energy production than a flat rate. Arguably this is actually more market driven. It does not tell when you have to run your appliances but makes you pay closer to the actual cost of using them. A 24 hour single rate is actually more "socialist" since the low cost users are subsidizing the high cost users.
If the government didn't regulate the production, supply and cost of electricity, the pricing structure would be a jungle of different prices for different times and amounts. This would be a nightmare that would end up costing far more.
Slashdot Mirror
Making a promise to keep serious illegal and/or immoral information confidential is wrong. Breaking that promise is by far the "lessor of two evils".
In an case, the promise made to keep these classes of information confidential does not include a statement like "I promise to keep any war crimes committed by my country or its agents confidential".
What they would like you to believe is that keeping these dirty secrets is the moral thing to do when in reality it is the exact opposite, you have a moral duty to report and denounce these things regardless of any promises that you may have made.
once you've eaten your cake you no longer have it, i.e. it's not cake anymore so you cannot have it as cake
Since the Mac was introduced Apple has been a control freak company (except maybe the period when Jobs was booted out for a while). They require massive marketing to promote their image which is mostly what they provide (i.e. an image). Since we are in a society awash in propaganda, it is unlikely that their near term financial success will change unless a substantial change in society occurs. What you see and value is not what most of those who buy their products see and value. Some of these consumers may have some values in common with you, but they will not see their own duplicity because Apple promotes an image of the contrary. (There are many corporations that do this, for example Nike)
The U.S. has signed the "Outer Space Treaty" which treats the moon like international waters, so nobody has claim to the moon exclusively. Russia (USSR) placed pennants there in 1959.
There are other issues that improve this type of retailers sales
There are some problems with this approach
Disclaimer: I buy a lot of stuff from Amazon (including from the US, Canada, France and occasionally the UK and Japan)
If anything, its purpose is fear, causing you to fear that things are so bad that this is necessary. They do not want you to feel too safe. The more things they "must" do, the more public paranoia there will be.
It has to do with getting you to accept more and more incursions into your privacy and getting you to believe that this is normal and reasonable.
A UFC fighter's abuse may be on a par with men just tens of thousands of years ago.
who typically lived only into their late 20s or early 30s.
IMO, the RIAA will be a major culprit in the death of music education in America.
and this is what they would like to happen. Their power rests on centralized control of music production and distribution.
from wikipedia, On October 27, 2007, Asia Times quoted Sukhoi's director, Mikhail Pogosyan, "We [India and Russia] will share the funding, engineering and intellectual property [of the new project] in a 50-50 proportion."
While India's role is more financial than technical, this will eventually lead them closer to being able to produce their own fighter. This is as much about acquiring the technical knowhow as acquiring fighters.
They are loans at the same rate as a US Treasury of the same maturity.
The initial 4 Tesla investment rounds yielded 187 million. In May Daimler invested 50 million for 10% indicating a perceived market value of around 500 million. Considering that that was before the 465 million government loan, one could assume that investors are probably very happy with their potential.
A business is an ongoing concern usually worth far more than its raw assets. The original investors all certainly knew that the company would take many years to reach a profit.
They are ripe for a high price buyout, especially if they successfully complete the Model S. The original investors will probably make more than 10x their original investment.
Except that you are incorrect, the sedan has a longer range, i.e. 300 miles.
The roadster has a range of 220/244 miles, the model S has a range of 300 miles. They did not just "remove" batteries. Since the car is larger and heavier, intended for a different purpose, they are not really comparable, like a Ferrari and BMW sedan are not really comparable.
Because they were designed for use among pedestrians. When you are on foot you do not want these things anywhere near you. They are obnoxious and dangerous to a pedestrian.
They do not belong on the sidewalk and you would be an idiot to use them on the road. For them to ever become popular, cities would need a redesign.
They cannot be easily moved up or down stairs, they are not acceptable on an elevator unless it is a freight elevator, they are difficult to get in or out of a car, they cannot be brought on public transportation.
Killing off the record companies could possibly be the dawn of a new age with much more diversity. Without the massive inefficiencies of the current music business, how many more musicians can be supported with the same revenue? The fact is, their massive control over the market, requires draconian control and just a few over-promoted stars that blot out the rest. The changes in the music world brought about by technology and the internet has already dramatically increased the access to many artists that we would have had previously.
Killing somebody for trespassing is murder, both morally and legally. If you really are worried about your safety, you would call the police first and only confront them when directly threatened. By purposely confronting them you increase the threat to yourself and anyone with you if they happen to really be dangerous.
On top of this, you're commenting about something that has happened to commercial property, not your private residence.
Please, stay in Texas
The trillion dollar car industry was already on its way to implosion. Even if the plan used the money up quickly, this just means that the car industry benefited that much more quickly.
The cost of the advertising is mostly in the fees to the media companies, if the program was canceled, they can quickly make new advertisements.
Medicare is far more efficient than the private health insurance. Rationing, to the extent that it exists at all, is far more rare in this countries than you state. Rationing is actually far worse in the US where the insurance companies do it as a matter of policy. We pay more per capita than any other country but our health care system is one of the worst for a non third world country.
No, this is part of a stimulus plan trying to jump start an economy that has been practically destroyed by laissez-faire capitalist fundamentalists.
Comparison of the Soviet Union to the U.S. is silly. The U.S. has many successful parts of a planned economy, like the highway system, the military. Many other countries have far more success central planned elements, like health care. Some things work better when centrally planned, some things do not. In the U.S., certain political elements exist to make sure that government fails.
And about the whole Soviet Union thing, during a period when the country went through immense turmoil, it raised the standard of living of the average person dramatically, so much so that until seventies, the west was paranoid that the system might actually be better economically. Then it went into stagnation. After the stagnation, the free market fundamentalists put a very large part of their population into poverty. They suffered severe stagnation under central planning fundamentalism and now they suffer under massive poverty under free market fundamentalism.
A lot has happened on this front already, see http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_go_co/us_cash_for_clunkers and http://www.nbc-2.com/Global/story.asp?S=10832983
You assume that children will act as responsibly as adults. They are in school to learn and part of that learning is discipline. If children were always allowed to do whatever they wanted, we would still be in caves or extinct. To incent children in this way would require a draconian punishment/reward system.
That is a lot more than the acrobat reader which is 41 MB for the linux version and 26 MB for Windows 7 version.
no, it is not shady, the Pre is simply telling iTunes that it is compatible with it
Not necessarily, one has to do more giving than taking if your partner has a way out. By making it excessively difficult to leave, allows one partner to be a bully.
The smart meter more closely follows actual cost of energy production than a flat rate. Arguably this is actually more market driven. It does not tell when you have to run your appliances but makes you pay closer to the actual cost of using them. A 24 hour single rate is actually more "socialist" since the low cost users are subsidizing the high cost users.
If the government didn't regulate the production, supply and cost of electricity, the pricing structure would be a jungle of different prices for different times and amounts. This would be a nightmare that would end up costing far more.