The evil rich spread wealth
on
Email Turns 34
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Many rich people put their money in Banks. Although they don't know it and hate the idea.. the money they put in banks is utilized to give out loans to people. When loans are given out.. that creates jobs. (eg: houses get built etc). And you may say that "well what if the economy tanks and people default on the loans".. Guess who loses out.. the rich.. cause then the houses get owned by the bank. And get resold at a loss at a low price.. Maybe even back to the people they repossessed the home from. LOL.
Anyway.. quality of life translates to many things.. fundamentally probably "energy at disposal" (stuff you own requires energy to make, and food itslf is just energy (energy to grow and energy to retriev). So fundamentally we cannot run out of raw materials becaue even when you throw things away it remains on the erath. The extraction of the material from mining or from landfills or wherever is what costs money. So anyway.. what we have is an energy problem. But even that is solvable.. For example the entire Sahara desert can be covered with solar panels or clean energy systems (deep geothermal or fusion if that ever becomes possible) and provide enough energy to sustain a decent quality of life for everyone on Earth. The only downside is that the improved quality of life may cause a stagnation or decline in global population because population growth rate tends to decline and become negative in rich countries (US is probably the only exception for a variety of reasons including immigration).
What a good idea.. think of how much money getting rid of half the directors sitting on the company's board would save! Not just from their salaries, but also from their inability to utilize workers to gain revenue growth and customer satisifaction. This would also block them from getting rid of people who will actually do work.
The Roman Empire. 800 years. The Egyptian pharoahs.. Millennia. Call me when we break 500.
And no, just because a system replaces a previous one, it doesnt prove that it's superior. It could just be bad luck, the weather, or mass hysterisis. How many coup d'etats and dictatorhips have taken over democracies in the last century in developing countries? Sure democracy worked in Europe. But corrupt politicians in newly democratic countries in Africa, Asia, and South America sold the people on "socialism" so that they can have centralized rule, resulting in millions of people dead of disease and starvation over the last 60 years.
The grandparent post used the word "perfectly capable", perfection should be held to a high standard. Maybe democracy will be replaced by computers.. a compucracy? or an algorocracy.. where sophisticated algorithms running on blazing fast massively parallel quantum processors determine the ideal laws and social characterisics (scary!) for sustaining a happy society. Someone make a movie. Oh yeah, the Matrix.
(Btw, I obviously do believe in democracy though in spite of what I said and the lack of "proof").
I don't give a damn about his points, they are irrelevant.
Since SCO paid money to MySQL and offered development assistance to MySQL.. How do we know they will not try to pull a stunt of saying MySQL stole ideas or misappropriated their money to incorporate new features into MySQL?
This is my biggest concern. I no longer feel safe using MySQL. There is now a risk of getting sued by SCO down the line. Anyone who thinks this is not far fetched.. so is the Linux suit.. and once they lose that they need another scam to pump up their stock. Sorry they had to sign a deal with the devil. This company SCO has declared in the past that they don't think the GPL is a legally valid document. To me it's simply not worth it to deal with the hassle. Honestly as much as I hate their companies I rather use Oracle *puke* or Microsoft SQL Server *vomit* than MySQL at this point, because i dont have to worry about being sued.
Fortunately we don't have to choose commercial because we have great alternative open source databases we can use. Sorry MySQL it's time for us to say goodbye.
The transparency effect against a black background.. makes the text hard to read (look at the IE window title in this one (note in some of the screenshots they intentionally blurred text, but not in the IE window in this shot):
Anyone can make DRM protected files according to MS specs. Without having to pay royalties or licensing. And if you download their SDK and have the dev environment.. it's mad easy to do on a large scale. Again, no royalties to Microsoft.
Apple is refusing to even LICENSE Fairplay, let alone allow others to make files protected by it. If you wish to make a song and sell it on your own website (and have DRM protection that's recognized by iPod) you can't. Sure you can make it available as MP3, but many artists dont wish to do that. You have to sell it on iTunes for 99cents. Well what if you want to sell it for 25 cents on your band website? Microsoft makes such things possible, but since iPod only understands the Fairplay DRM scheme, it's not a a viable option for anybody.
Regardless of whether you support the idea of DRM, I dont see how people blindly lend their support to Apple. Make the iPod DRM free! Or use at least don't use a monopolistic propreitery DRM format. I understand everyone on here hates DRM. I hate DRM even more. But how come Apple is getting a free pass utilizing it?
There are ways to get non iTunes purchased music on the iPod but they are all inconvenient hacks that strip DRM.
Alternatives to Windows exist but that doesnt mean Mirosoft isn't monopolistic. Apple has historically been very closed (no mac clones) and now they are unfairly monopolizing the online music industry. They are using the popularity of the iPod player to lock people into using iTunes, which in turn helps them sell iPods because the purchased music must be copied to iPods rather than other mp3 players (without using a hack). If they had confidence in their mp3 player they would open up the Fairplay format and allow competition in music sales.
I have seen evidence that commercial beats government. But SpaceShipOne is not it. They acheived what NASA and the soviets acheived over 3 decades ago.
Given that the rockets used by NASA are designed by third party commercial contractors, how come they aren't heavily in this game?
Okay, too many laws, dummy. But tell me, when you want to smuggle goods, launder money, exploit worker's rights, cheat your boss - exactly HOW will "don't intentionally hurt anyone" allow someone to reach a prosecute you for your complicated and subtle crimes?
The same way a person gets prosecuted today you moron! Even TODAY under current laws unintentional effects of actions are NOT prosecuted. Just because you break a law and get caught, it doesnt mean you will get prosecuted and given the maximum sentence. If the DA feels the intent wasn't there or heck wants to play golf he/she can decide not to press charges or ask for a lighter sentence. Go look up "prosecutorial discretion". Laws are there to provide jobs for legislators. And besides that important task, laws are also to provide sentence rules to ensure "uniformity" of punishment. That's the part in which there's a problem. Look at all the "horse and buggy" laws on the books today that are useless in todays context. In 100 years, people will ask what phishing is... (OK maybe a bad example).
All the crimes you describe involve someone who is taking actions with the intent of harming someone/people. Those can get prosecuted under a one law system. The only difference is that the application of sentences will be different and non uniform. That is the case to some extent today as well. Which is fine because the level of intent etc. in each crime is different. So, even today, sentences are determined by judges more than they are by legislators, but legislators are seeking to change that by the creation of more laws.
Are legislators experts in understanding what an appropriate sentence is? Is it something they have studied, or is it something they determine based on public opinion? Punishments for crime today is determined solely on emotions, rather than factual understanding of appropriate punishment. It's like building a house on emotions rather than architectural/engineering principles. It might be possible, but is it optimal? Would you want legislators to design bridges any less than you would want them to determine if a robber goes free? What's a moral and appropriate punishment that will provide the optimal benefit from a punishment (ie, will result in the offender not repeating the crime and producing value to the society). Example, are the mandatory sentences for drug crimes an optimal solution? Right now, that's a bridge designed by legislators and contracted out to the judicial system (lawyers, judges, and juries)..who are the ones who end up getting blamed yet were forced to apply the law they had no part in creating.
Actually why do we have so many damn laws? We can get rid of legislators by getting rid of laws.
Think of the saving to sanity and finances?
We should have only one law: "Don't do anything to harm someone else intentionally". God had the right idea when he gave Moses ten laws, provide us the bible as a sort of guideline to acheiving those laws. Not kidding.
We should have the one law of "don't hurt others intentionally" and then have a transparent system that enables qualified judges to make justified decisions on what appropriate punishments are based on circumstances and deservement (is that a word).
Laws get bought and even in democracies are based on people's current emotions at the time, and they are too non specific in the way they are written anyway. My point is that by have so many laws, they are over specific and miss too many situations.
It just seems like there are an infinite number of situations and deserved punishments that trying to codify them can lead to problems and more injustice than what the intent of laws is. Each crime is slightly different.
I actually clicked the link to RTFA for once. And then all I see is a list! Surely they should specify what the ranking is based on? For me, security and reliability is important. For some people, it's ease of use. And for others, it's whether the icons use cartoon characters. Free advice to PC World: put some context as to what the ranking is based on! What were the criteria? And, if the criterias didnt weigh equally let us know that too?
The Cambodians had an evil machine run by groups of people that killed millions. So did Stalin, In the last 100 years think of all the evil that "groups" of people have carried out.
Governments dont have to be efficient, in fact the incompetence is what is scary. Innocent people will get screwed and the guilty will go free. The commies failed because even though they killed a lot of people, it was not necessarily the people they wanted to get. That's what the lack of oversight brings. The reason oversight is frowned upon is so that mistakes can be covered up.
If you are innocent, beware of inefficient groups of people.
Sadly there are those who dont care if there are innocent people getting screwed, as long as it's not them and they feel safe.
It's cheaper to "sacrifice" some innocents than to find out if their punishment is deserved.
Why do you think people support the idea of not finding out whether a non citizen is guilty before locking them up for life in Gitmo?
By selling advertising? Great for google. But what about me? I'm going to be inundated with advertising and products that never come out of beta? Or will they release "Google OpenSolaris"? Oh, maybe they'll introduce "for pay" google? That's when I switch to yahoo.
Anyway, if I was Microsoft.. I'd be shitting bricks over Apple.
When they release OS X for x86 that can install on general computers, people will be screwed. Corporations may switch to Apple because there won't be fear of single vendor hardware lock in (no need to pay $$ for xpensive replacement parts). And most damning for microsoft the overall cost of Windows will have to drop to $49.99 resulting in mad revenue decline.
Plus due to Napster's totally lame advertising, and mp3 player competitor's lack of design ability, Apple will make buttloads of $$ off entertainment devices like how Sony did in the 80's and 90's. Only way Apple can lose momentum is if the price of flash drops to $1 or less a gig. And they have to compete with $9.99 mp3 players.
Not sure how many VOIP providers offer this.. but VOIP voice mail should be sent as an attachment in an email. And when a person makes a VOIP call.. they should have the option of sending a text message or listening to a custom message.. or.. when you make a VOIP call.. you may be able to get IM'd back (text to speech if the caller isn't logged into IM?) or an IM that reads "I'm not here, leave an IM".
Calls to reach me should not have to know which device I am currently on. That is.. am I on my desktop? Or am I out with my cell phone while my desktop happens to be logged in? Or is my desktop and laptop off? AIM solves some of this by enabling multiple simultaneous logons.. which is great because I never have to be signed off.. I can sign in to AIM from work and then sign off from work..all the while my home desktop stays logged on.
But on the top of my feature list is encryption end to end encryption. Along with this notion of encryption is the call blocking/receiving capability.. callers would have to prove their identity before a call gets through (for example if i only want certain people or people from a certain group/company to get through). If I am on vacation I only want friends to be able to contact me, not people from work,,they can get forwarded to email or IM depending what I choose.
If a VOIP service can offer me these services and cell phone integration.. then I'm in. Seems like google, msn, or yahoo would be able to deliver on these needs.
Americans like bigger cars, bigger computers, amd more fries. That's just how it is. There's more space in America. And I don't know about others, but I don't like to squint to read stuff and keep clicking scroll. Maybe the Japanese words take up less pixels so this isnt an issue?
I have heard that it's actually faster to type japanese words on a cell than english words on a keyboard. Can someone confirm or refute this?
American innovation focuses on making things easier. It's a step backward to have to type on a tiny number keyboard. If there were a better way to input data into the cellphone (touchscreen/voice?), and to read it without squinting or scrolling, then it would sell. It's a whole lot easier to call someone than to text them.
I don't think corporations really complained about a shortage of high-tech workers.
It was *cheap* high-tech workers that they said were in short supply...
Wouldnt you complain if gas prices were very high?
They want low cost labor.. why is this a problem? Would you argue against automation? Why shouldnt companies be allowed to hire whoever they want based on the wage they are willing to work for? Construction workers work hard, and would love to earn as much as IT workers..but they cant. How come nobody argues construction workers should get paid the same as IT workers? For that matter why not pay someone at macdonalds $60k+? Doesnt everyone deserve more money?
Unfortunately, IT workers think that just because they wasted time in college... other people are obligated to hire them. This is ridiculous! Salaries shouldnt be based on how intelligent a person thinks of themselves as being, it should be based on how much a person needs you.
This is the essence of trade. If a carpenter labors for hours making a table with an intricate design and prices it at 1000 silver pieces, and a rival carpenter makes an ugly chair and prices it at 10 silver pieces, nobody is morally obligated to buy the more expensive chair.
This has been the essence of trade for milleniums.
If you are unable to provide value.. DO SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE REAL VALUE IN.. or price yourself lower. Deal with it instead of taking it out on people who are willing to make more sacrifices.
America supposedly have a Christian heritage, yet the whole bible isn't followed.
For example many "Christians" believe that it's ok to torture people without knowing for 100% certain that they are guilty, because it can save lives.. that it's ok to torture some non US citizen innocents if americans are to be saved. I have heard this view being pushed as to why the prisoners in Gitmo shouldnt have rights, we dont have an obligation to determine their guilt or innocence and therefore they should be tortured for information.
Many so called christians are in no way deserving of that name. That is the reason many people have turned away from chrisianity. Because of the false ambassadors.
However the bible is quite clear:
Proverbs 16:8 (New International Version) 8 Better a little with righteousness than much gain with injustice
And the meme going around that illegal immigrants deserve no rights:
Jeremiah 22:3 3 This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of his oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the alien, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.
Deuteronomy 1:16 16 And I charged your judges at that time: Hear the disputes between your brothers and judge fairly, whether the case is between brother Israelites or between one of them and an alien.
Leviticus 24:22 22 You are to have the same law for the alien and the native-born. I am the LORD your God.' "
Exodus 12:49 49 The same law applies to the native-born and to the alien living among you."
Leviticus 19:33 When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him.
Deuteronomy 10:18 He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien, giving him food and clothing.
(there are a lot more.. try searching or better yet read the whole book)
Apple did introduce a great product in Ipod, proving that usability and industrial design can help corner a market. And the tie in to itunes was an excellent idea from the perspective of locking in a market. Furthermore the inability of ipod to understand any DRM other than Fairplay means taht any musician who wants to sell music and have it be portable while having DRM must sell via itunes. These are all great ways to sell a product, and "bring portable music to the masses."
History is full of great but evil inventors. For example, the inventor of the process that enables nitrgen rich fertilizers which saves countless lives also designed and took pleasure in designing German poison gas weapons.
I am not comparing Apple to that in any remote sense, but I am making the point that just because someone brings forth innovation to the world doesnt mean they get a free pass trampling rights.
You had people all over the US talking about how third world uncivilized people deserved the tsunami. And people like michael savage etc. saying no federal aid should be sent to help other countries. Being libertarian, I can agree that with the concept of federal assistance being bad, I dont see why he has a vitriolic resentment of it considering how miniscule the foreign aid budget is (especially after you deduct military assistance to high income countries that somehow counts as "aid"). After the tsunami, I even came across a weblog (ernie i think) that said something to the effect of "those civilizations have been around for thousands of years longer than us and didnt advance so they deserved it. Too bad, f*ck 'em".
Like every single individuals and kids who died or were orphaned had done stuff to deserve what happened to them.
And then there was the radio show host who said he didnt care about people who couldn't swim.
About new orleans, you the media (sean hannity/fox) reported a blatant lie that foreign countries didnt step up to offer aid and assistance for new orleans.
The point I am making is that you have a large segment (thankfully not the majority) of the US population who thinks the rest of the world is all evil and can go to hell. These same people are now sayuing "screw new orleans bunch of savages". Sure there are scumbags causing trouble there.. but a vast majority of people are there because they didnt have the means (no cars & buses) to evacuate in time..let me stress that not every new orleans person is involved in looting.
Slashdot Mirror
Many rich people put their money in Banks. Although they don't know it and hate the idea .. the money they put in banks is utilized to give out loans to people. When loans are given out .. that creates jobs. (eg: houses get built etc). And you may say that "well what if the economy tanks and people default on the loans" .. Guess who loses out .. the rich .. cause then the houses get owned by the bank. And get resold at a loss at a low price .. Maybe even back to the people they repossessed the home from. LOL.
.. quality of life translates to many things .. fundamentally probably "energy at disposal" (stuff you own requires energy to make, and food itslf is just energy (energy to grow and energy to retriev). So fundamentally we cannot run out of raw materials becaue even when you throw things away it remains on the erath. The extraction of the material from mining or from landfills or wherever is what costs money. So anyway .. what we have is an energy problem. But even that is solvable .. For example the entire Sahara desert can be covered with solar panels or clean energy systems (deep geothermal or fusion if that ever becomes possible) and provide enough energy to sustain a decent quality of life for everyone on Earth. The only downside is that the improved quality of life may cause a stagnation or decline in global population because population growth rate tends to decline and become negative in rich countries (US is probably the only exception for a variety of reasons including immigration).
Anyway
What the hell .. we are going to like DRM because Bill Gates says it's wrong?
How stupid.
Anyone who realizes this cult mentality can use it against us. What if he's really pro DRM and saying he isn't? LOL!
Most of the postings on here are actually supporting DRM !! WTF??
Has their seething hatred of Bill Gates caused people to blindly lose their sense of reason??
Isn't it possible to hate without losing a sense of reason?
instituting personnel cuts across the board
.. think of how much money getting rid of half the directors sitting on the company's board would save! Not just from their salaries, but also from their inability to utilize workers to gain revenue growth and customer satisifaction. This would also block them from getting rid of people who will actually do work.
What a good idea
I am going to buy Novell stock when they do this.
The Roman Empire. 800 years. The Egyptian pharoahs .. Millennia. Call me when we break 500.
.. a compucracy? or an algorocracy.. where sophisticated algorithms running on blazing fast massively parallel quantum processors determine the ideal laws and social characterisics (scary!) for sustaining a happy society. Someone make a movie. Oh yeah, the Matrix.
And no, just because a system replaces a previous one, it doesnt prove that it's superior. It could just be bad luck, the weather, or mass hysterisis. How many coup d'etats and dictatorhips have taken over democracies in the last century in developing countries? Sure democracy worked in Europe. But corrupt politicians in newly democratic countries in Africa, Asia, and South America sold the people on "socialism" so that they can have centralized rule, resulting in millions of people dead of disease and starvation over the last 60 years.
The grandparent post used the word "perfectly capable", perfection should be held to a high standard. Maybe democracy will be replaced by computers
(Btw, I obviously do believe in democracy though in spite of what I said and the lack of "proof").
Well, those naysayers were wrong, and commoners are perfectly capable of running representational democracies.
I'm not sure how much, if at all, I'm joking when I ask you "And your proof of this is what?"
I don't give a damn about his points, they are irrelevant.
.. How do we know they will not try to pull a stunt of saying MySQL stole ideas or misappropriated their money to incorporate new features into MySQL?
.. so is the Linux suit .. and once they lose that they need another scam to pump up their stock. Sorry they had to sign a deal with the devil. This company SCO has declared in the past that they don't think the GPL is a legally valid document. To me it's simply not worth it to deal with the hassle. Honestly as much as I hate their companies I rather use Oracle *puke* or Microsoft SQL Server *vomit* than MySQL at this point, because i dont have to worry about being sued.
Since SCO paid money to MySQL and offered development assistance to MySQL
This is my biggest concern. I no longer feel safe using MySQL. There is now a risk of getting sued by SCO down the line. Anyone who thinks this is not far fetched
Fortunately we don't have to choose commercial because we have great alternative open source databases we can use. Sorry MySQL it's time for us to say goodbye.
The transparency effect against a black background .. makes the text hard to read (look at the IE window title in this one (note in some of the screenshots they intentionally blurred text, but not in the IE window in this shot):
g
http://www.neowin.net/staff/cashman/vist5321_2.jp
Anyone can make DRM protected files according to MS specs. Without having to pay royalties or licensing. And if you download their SDK and have the dev environment.. it's mad easy to do on a large scale. Again, no royalties to Microsoft.
Apple is refusing to even LICENSE Fairplay, let alone allow others to make files protected by it. If you wish to make a song and sell it on your own website (and have DRM protection that's recognized by iPod) you can't. Sure you can make it available as MP3, but many artists dont wish to do that. You have to sell it on iTunes for 99cents. Well what if you want to sell it for 25 cents on your band website? Microsoft makes such things possible, but since iPod only understands the Fairplay DRM scheme, it's not a a viable option for anybody.
Regardless of whether you support the idea of DRM, I dont see how people blindly lend their support to Apple. Make the iPod DRM free! Or use at least don't use a monopolistic propreitery DRM format. I understand everyone on here hates DRM. I hate DRM even more. But how come Apple is getting a free pass utilizing it?
There are ways to get non iTunes purchased music on the iPod but they are all inconvenient hacks that strip DRM.
Alternatives to Windows exist but that doesnt mean Mirosoft isn't monopolistic. Apple has historically been very closed (no mac clones) and now they are unfairly monopolizing the online music industry. They are using the popularity of the iPod player to lock people into using iTunes, which in turn helps them sell iPods because the purchased music must be copied to iPods rather than other mp3 players (without using a hack). If they had confidence in their mp3 player they would open up the Fairplay format and allow competition in music sales.
I have seen evidence that commercial beats government. But SpaceShipOne is not it. They acheived what NASA and the soviets acheived over 3 decades ago.
Given that the rockets used by NASA are designed by third party commercial contractors, how come they aren't heavily in this game?
Having read this comment I think we need a "poorly researched" mod on slashdot. I havent looked into it enough to see if there's really a need though.
Oh yeah, and it shouldn't be a negative mod.
That's why he's not popular today.
... (OK maybe a bad example).
..who are the ones who end up getting blamed yet were forced to apply the law they had no part in creating.
Okay, too many laws, dummy. But tell me, when you want to smuggle goods, launder money, exploit worker's rights, cheat your boss - exactly HOW will "don't intentionally hurt anyone" allow someone to reach a prosecute you for your complicated and subtle crimes?
The same way a person gets prosecuted today you moron! Even TODAY under current laws unintentional effects of actions are NOT prosecuted. Just because you break a law and get caught, it doesnt mean you will get prosecuted and given the maximum sentence. If the DA feels the intent wasn't there or heck wants to play golf he/she can decide not to press charges or ask for a lighter sentence. Go look up "prosecutorial discretion". Laws are there to provide jobs for legislators. And besides that important task, laws are also to provide sentence rules to ensure "uniformity" of punishment. That's the part in which there's a problem. Look at all the "horse and buggy" laws on the books today that are useless in todays context. In 100 years, people will ask what phishing is
All the crimes you describe involve someone who is taking actions with the intent of harming someone/people. Those can get prosecuted under a one law system. The only difference is that the application of sentences will be different and non uniform. That is the case to some extent today as well. Which is fine because the level of intent etc. in each crime is different. So, even today, sentences are determined by judges more than they are by legislators, but legislators are seeking to change that by the creation of more laws.
Are legislators experts in understanding what an appropriate sentence is? Is it something they have studied, or is it something they determine based on public opinion? Punishments for crime today is determined solely on emotions, rather than factual understanding of appropriate punishment. It's like building a house on emotions rather than architectural/engineering principles. It might be possible, but is it optimal? Would you want legislators to design bridges any less than you would want them to determine if a robber goes free? What's a moral and appropriate punishment that will provide the optimal benefit from a punishment (ie, will result in the offender not repeating the crime and producing value to the society). Example, are the mandatory sentences for drug crimes an optimal solution? Right now, that's a bridge designed by legislators and contracted out to the judicial system (lawyers, judges, and juries)
Actually why do we have so many damn laws? We can get rid of legislators by getting rid of laws.
Think of the saving to sanity and finances?
We should have only one law: "Don't do anything to harm someone else intentionally". God had the right idea when he gave Moses ten laws, provide us the bible as a sort of guideline to acheiving those laws. Not kidding.
We should have the one law of "don't hurt others intentionally" and then have a transparent system that enables qualified judges to make justified decisions on what appropriate punishments are based on circumstances and deservement (is that a word).
Laws get bought and even in democracies are based on people's current emotions at the time, and they are too non specific in the way they are written anyway. My point is that by have so many laws, they are over specific and miss too many situations.
It just seems like there are an infinite number of situations and deserved punishments that trying to codify them can lead to problems and more injustice than what the intent of laws is. Each crime is slightly different.
I actually clicked the link to RTFA for once. And then all I see is a list! Surely they should specify what the ranking is based on? For me, security and reliability is important. For some people, it's ease of use. And for others, it's whether the icons use cartoon characters. Free advice to PC World: put some context as to what the ranking is based on! What were the criteria? And, if the criterias didnt weigh equally let us know that too?
The Cambodians had an evil machine run by groups of people that killed millions. So did Stalin, In the last 100 years think of all the evil that "groups" of people have carried out.
Governments dont have to be efficient, in fact the incompetence is what is scary. Innocent people will get screwed and the guilty will go free. The commies failed because even though they killed a lot of people, it was not necessarily the people they wanted to get. That's what the lack of oversight brings. The reason oversight is frowned upon is so that mistakes can be covered up.
If you are innocent, beware of inefficient groups of people.
Sadly there are those who dont care if there are innocent people getting screwed, as long as it's not them and they feel safe.
It's cheaper to "sacrifice" some innocents than to find out if their punishment is deserved.
Why do you think people support the idea of not finding out whether a non citizen is guilty before locking them up for life in Gitmo?
I'm keeping my tinfoil hat on. Tight.
in parent post I meant to say microsoft will be screwed .. not people will be screwed. People will benefit obviously!!
By selling advertising? Great for google. But what about me? I'm going to be inundated with advertising and products that never come out of beta? Or will they release "Google OpenSolaris"? Oh, maybe they'll introduce "for pay" google? That's when I switch to yahoo.
.. I'd be shitting bricks over Apple.
Anyway, if I was Microsoft
When they release OS X for x86 that can install on general computers, people will be screwed. Corporations may switch to Apple because there won't be fear of single vendor hardware lock in (no need to pay $$ for xpensive replacement parts). And most damning for microsoft the overall cost of Windows will have to drop to $49.99 resulting in mad revenue decline.
Plus due to Napster's totally lame advertising, and mp3 player competitor's lack of design ability, Apple will make buttloads of $$ off entertainment devices like how Sony did in the 80's and 90's. Only way Apple can lose momentum is if the price of flash drops to $1 or less a gig. And they have to compete with $9.99 mp3 players.
Anjanappa, Muniswamappa
A person may have a mic in his mouth, but that's not going to help anyone trying to say this guy's name.
Not sure how many VOIP providers offer this .. but VOIP voice mail should be sent as an attachment in an email. And when a person makes a VOIP call .. they should have the option of sending a text message or listening to a custom message .. or .. when you make a VOIP call .. you may be able to get IM'd back (text to speech if the caller isn't logged into IM?) or an IM that reads "I'm not here, leave an IM".
.. am I on my desktop? Or am I out with my cell phone while my desktop happens to be logged in? Or is my desktop and laptop off? AIM solves some of this by enabling multiple simultaneous logons .. which is great because I never have to be signed off .. I can sign in to AIM from work and then sign off from work ..all the while my home desktop stays logged on.
.. callers would have to prove their identity before a call gets through (for example if i only want certain people or people from a certain group/company to get through). If I am on vacation I only want friends to be able to contact me, not people from work ,,they can get forwarded to email or IM depending what I choose.
.. then I'm in. Seems like google, msn, or yahoo would be able to deliver on these needs.
Calls to reach me should not have to know which device I am currently on. That is
But on the top of my feature list is encryption end to end encryption. Along with this notion of encryption is the call blocking/receiving capability
If a VOIP service can offer me these services and cell phone integration
Americans like bigger cars, bigger computers, amd more fries. That's just how it is. There's more space in America. And I don't know about others, but I don't like to squint to read stuff and keep clicking scroll. Maybe the Japanese words take up less pixels so this isnt an issue?
I have heard that it's actually faster to type japanese words on a cell than english words on a keyboard. Can someone confirm or refute this?
American innovation focuses on making things easier. It's a step backward to have to type on a tiny number keyboard. If there were a better way to input data into the cellphone (touchscreen/voice?), and to read it without squinting or scrolling, then it would sell. It's a whole lot easier to call someone than to text them.
I don't think corporations really complained about a shortage of high-tech workers.
.. why is this a problem? Would you argue against automation? Why shouldnt companies be allowed to hire whoever they want based on the wage they are willing to work for? Construction workers work hard, and would love to earn as much as IT workers ..but they cant. How come nobody argues construction workers should get paid the same as IT workers? For that matter why not pay someone at macdonalds $60k+? Doesnt everyone deserve more money?
... other people are obligated to hire them. This is ridiculous! Salaries shouldnt be based on how intelligent a person thinks of themselves as being, it should be based on how much a person needs you.
.. DO SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE REAL VALUE IN .. or price yourself lower. Deal with it instead of taking it out on people who are willing to make more sacrifices.
It was *cheap* high-tech workers that they said were in short supply...
Wouldnt you complain if gas prices were very high?
They want low cost labor
Unfortunately, IT workers think that just because they wasted time in college
This is the essence of trade. If a carpenter labors for hours making a table with an intricate design and prices it at 1000 silver pieces, and a rival carpenter makes an ugly chair and prices it at 10 silver pieces, nobody is morally obligated to buy the more expensive chair.
This has been the essence of trade for milleniums.
If you are unable to provide value
America supposedly have a Christian heritage, yet the whole bible isn't followed.
.. that it's ok to torture some non US citizen innocents if americans are to be saved. I have heard this view being pushed as to why the prisoners in Gitmo shouldnt have rights, we dont have an obligation to determine their guilt or innocence and therefore they should be tortured for information.
.. try searching or better yet read the whole book)
For example many "Christians" believe that it's ok to torture people without knowing for 100% certain that they are guilty, because it can save lives
Many so called christians are in no way deserving of that name. That is the reason many people have turned away from chrisianity. Because of the false ambassadors.
However the bible is quite clear:
Proverbs 16:8 (New International Version)
8 Better a little with righteousness than much gain with injustice
And the meme going around that illegal immigrants deserve no rights:
Jeremiah 22:3
3 This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of his oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the alien, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.
Deuteronomy 1:16
16 And I charged your judges at that time: Hear the disputes between your brothers and judge fairly, whether the case is between brother Israelites or between one of them and an alien.
Leviticus 24:22
22 You are to have the same law for the alien and the native-born. I am the LORD your God.' "
Exodus 12:49
49 The same law applies to the native-born and to the alien living among you."
Leviticus 19:33
When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him.
Deuteronomy 10:18
He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien, giving him food and clothing.
(there are a lot more
I'd be betting the following anounts that it'll come to fruition within 100 years..
Fusion Power: $1000
Space Elevator: $10
Microsoft Linux: $3
Perpetual Motion: $2
Duke Nukem Forever: 1 cent
Apple did introduce a great product in Ipod, proving that usability and industrial design can help corner a market. And the tie in to itunes was an excellent idea from the perspective of locking in a market. Furthermore the inability of ipod to understand any DRM other than Fairplay means taht any musician who wants to sell music and have it be portable while having DRM must sell via itunes. These are all great ways to sell a product, and "bring portable music to the masses."
History is full of great but evil inventors. For example, the inventor of the process that enables nitrgen rich fertilizers which saves countless lives also designed and took pleasure in designing German poison gas weapons.
I am not comparing Apple to that in any remote sense, but I am making the point that just because someone brings forth innovation to the world doesnt mean they get a free pass trampling rights.
..until the Wright brothers built one.
A thirty, fifty, or even seventy-five year delay doesnt mean people should write a technology off!
What makes this different? Well rtfa.
You had people all over the US talking about how third world uncivilized people deserved the tsunami. And people like michael savage etc. saying no federal aid should be sent to help other countries. Being libertarian, I can agree that with the concept of federal assistance being bad, I dont see why he has a vitriolic resentment of it considering how miniscule the foreign aid budget is (especially after you deduct military assistance to high income countries that somehow counts as "aid"). After the tsunami, I even came across a weblog (ernie i think) that said something to the effect of "those civilizations have been around for thousands of years longer than us and didnt advance so they deserved it. Too bad, f*ck 'em".
/fox) reported a blatant lie that foreign countries didnt step up to offer aid and assistance for new orleans.
d /index.html
.. but a vast majority of people are there because they didnt have the means (no cars & buses) to evacuate in time ..let me stress that not every new orleans person is involved in looting.
Like every single individuals and kids who died or were orphaned had done stuff to deserve what happened to them.
And then there was the radio show host who said he didnt care about people who couldn't swim.
About new orleans, you the media (sean hannity
Here's a report that contradicts what sean hannity was saying:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/05/katrina.world.ai
The point I am making is that you have a large segment (thankfully not the majority) of the US population who thinks the rest of the world is all evil and can go to hell. These same people are now sayuing "screw new orleans bunch of savages". Sure there are scumbags causing trouble there