CDNs cost too much. It's hard to compete with 2 cents/megabit Cogent upstream pricing. Of course it will suck. That's why you're paying 2 cents/megabit for it. It's no damn wonder Netflix is pushing so damn hard for peering arrangements. They don't want to pay for bandwidth anymore. It's a sound business model. They're also being dishonest as all fuck about it, and trying to turn it into a net neutrality issue, when it isn't.
An interesting gun... Here in People-Who-Are-Actually-Professional-Network-EngineersVille, we'd simply accept that our current cheapest-available-transit-provider has shitty connectivity (really? Cogent? really really? Well done, Netflix. Not pinching any pennies, at all) and get a provider that didn't offer bargain bin connectivity and shitty routes to just about everyone. But hey. It's entirely the receiving network's fault.
Ze Germans are definitely not to be fucked with. I wouldn't call being pinched between the British Empire, the US, and the Soviet Union a fair fight. The fact that for any amount of time, it appeared fair is... strikingly scary.
Even supercriticality is designed in. A fissile mass going supercritical isn't guaranteed to not reach a new equilibrium when the increased temperatures of the system and all that comes with that come into play... Of course that new equilibrium could be after it radically fissions all of the fuel in a microsecond, which is one of the typically not-designed (and generally impossible) supercritical modes of the reactor
Men aren't angels, and the ones in government are no exception. Just to clarify that this is not innocent government corrupted by evil corporations, but men in both government and corporations working for their own selfish benefit.
Completely agree.
Charters are acquired from some authority. Like a government.
Yes, and where government doesn't exist to grant said charter with limitations, groups of people will form their own entity and might will make right. Hope you're a shareholder.
Voluntary transactions requires an offer of greater value to entice agreement. Involuntary transactions can resort to strongarm tactics, and so offering greater value is a lesser concern and often skipped..
Taxation is a voluntary transaction for me, and I have the ability (and right) to be represented in the decision making process that leads to it, de jure anyway. De facto is admittedly a different scenario.
I pay taxes so that I will have a better infrastructure where I live. Living in Seattle, Washington, southern Oregon, and northwest Arkansas, I will choose taxation over not, and gladly.
I understand that you are individually speaking impacted by taxes, but you are at least represented in that decision making process (again, de jure)
Where there is not strong government to contest the power of Corporations, they can and will exercise their power extrajudiciously. They will not be bound by law. They will shit in the water, they will shit in the air, they will put a bullet in your kid's head for getting too close to their transport truck. They WILL. They DO. I understand the need and desire for a strongly controlled government, I really do... but a weak one? That terrifies me.
That is why I added the caveat of: "the resulting product is worth [more_than_value]".
I have no intention of addressing failed business models, in Government or any other business. I'm addressing the fallacious claim that Government cannot create wealth, that it just redistributes it. Any argument for that applies equally to a large number of powerful corporations.
I will definitely concede the great point you've made about bankruptcy- Government certainly has a favorable stance with regard to its business, but I think I'd prefer it that way. Improved electoral processes could curb that.
The monopoly you cite on violent force is only a monopoly in recent times. In ye olden days (100 years ago, and less in cases), violent force has been employed with impunity by corporate entities. In my eye, the Government is simply the biggest Corporation on the block, and one we're lucky enough to be able to vote for representation in (ignoring the obvious problems with the electoral process in the US)
Correct, my local government does grant that monopoly.
But don't think they did it without being asked/persuaded (corruption) to.
In the complete absence of a representative government, that I can at least vote for, a corporation would form to serve its same function, without representation. We saw this with the earliest corporate charters in the early Age of Exploration empires. We saw this in the West in the US, even. Where there is a power void, something will fill it. Corporations (large groups of pooled resources) are powerful. Wouldn't you at least like to be able to have a say in the most powerful one overall? (Government)
Not remotely relevant. If acquires for , hires people to do work, and the resulting product is worth , they have created wealth. The only real difference is who owns the generated wealth.
There's also the fact that only a fucking moron would claim one can reasonably live in modern society without being indirectly forced into purchasing quite a few products from corporations; of course, should someone do this, they won't need money for very much, and thus won't have to work, and thus won't be taxed... Shit. They really are the goddamn same. Do you know when elections are for my local power company representative?
Adorable. Like a White House press secretary, you do a little spin, and now the topic is so fucking confused that no one knows what they were even saying before the drivel spewed forth. I salute you. Hey, aren't you the tool who tried to expand his link-farm business into Wikipedia, and actively promotes paid-for PR editing? You're my hero, man.
Shaking it at the darker-skinned, more advanced people who repeatedly pounded their inferior barbarian asses into the dirt for a couple thousand years?
How quickly we all want to forget where we came from. If the white race is superior in intelligence due to evolution, then the trait cropped up sometime in very, very recent history. More likely, the white race is just the newest ethnic empire to rise from the ashes of its predecessors. And as is human nature, whoever succeeds them will likely look down on them as inferior barbarians, while thinking that they have been superior all along.
I'd like to think the merit of the argument stands on its own legs, regardless of the name or anonymity of the poster. Unless of course you're attempt to debunk his argument by virtue of that facet.. In which case, +1 Ironic. I like your sense of humor.
Or it's a rebuttal that his conclusions are non-sequitur with regard to the evidence he (they) provided.
Someone displays evidence of a statistical correlation between serum lead levels, and violence.
I then postulate that they have proven that GM is responsible for the high violence rates during the time tetraethyllead was in use in gasoline.
Am I right? Maybe. But the evidence certainly can't be used to reach that conclusion.
Wrong. They're saying the conclusions drawn from the research are incorrect. That it's non-sequitur.
Do you suffer from a reading comprehension problem, or is cognitive dissonance compelling you to throw yourself upon the saber of false assertions to prevent your world-view from imploding?
It would, if black people living in northern latitudes didn't get enough sunlight to generate the requisite amount of Vitamin D. That is however nowhere near the case.
Unless of course those black ancestors of the europeans invented the office job and couldn't get their asses outside for a few minutes a few days a week, or slathered themselves in sunscreen, or hid behind UV-filtering glass.
That must be it- it completely explains why Northern/Southern native Americans and siberian tribes have such pale skin!
Very true. Mostly because they were wearing loincloths while the older empires were playing with siege weaponry.
Great civilizations are not a white invention, we were simply the last to enter the game, and won out against our ailing competitors.
The next age won't be ours though, that much is certain. I wonder if in the future, people will argue that white people are an inferior race since all the great civilizations will likely exist in Asia
He IS, and for precisely the reason you say. His IQ is probably more affected by him being an introverted autodidact than genetics. Very intelligent people can bomb IQ tests, and some people who would largely be regarded as "dumb" can ace them. It's not unheard of for introverted autodidacts to emerge from impoverished families, of all "races".
Of course, given his lack of any form of deductive reasoning past step 1, I'm going to conclude that he simply isn't as smart as he thinks he is.
Slashdot Mirror
CDNs cost too much. It's hard to compete with 2 cents/megabit Cogent upstream pricing. Of course it will suck. That's why you're paying 2 cents/megabit for it. It's no damn wonder Netflix is pushing so damn hard for peering arrangements. They don't want to pay for bandwidth anymore. It's a sound business model. They're also being dishonest as all fuck about it, and trying to turn it into a net neutrality issue, when it isn't.
An interesting gun... Here in People-Who-Are-Actually-Professional-Network-EngineersVille, we'd simply accept that our current cheapest-available-transit-provider has shitty connectivity (really? Cogent? really really? Well done, Netflix. Not pinching any pennies, at all) and get a provider that didn't offer bargain bin connectivity and shitty routes to just about everyone. But hey. It's entirely the receiving network's fault.
Ze Germans are definitely not to be fucked with. I wouldn't call being pinched between the British Empire, the US, and the Soviet Union a fair fight. The fact that for any amount of time, it appeared fair is... strikingly scary.
Sure it does, especially when the orbit starts to precess.
Even supercriticality is designed in. A fissile mass going supercritical isn't guaranteed to not reach a new equilibrium when the increased temperatures of the system and all that comes with that come into play... Of course that new equilibrium could be after it radically fissions all of the fuel in a microsecond, which is one of the typically not-designed (and generally impossible) supercritical modes of the reactor
Not entirely sure if you're joking or ignorant...
What, out of curiosity, led you to choose that date?
Men aren't angels, and the ones in government are no exception. Just to clarify that this is not innocent government corrupted by evil corporations, but men in both government and corporations working for their own selfish benefit.
Completely agree.
Charters are acquired from some authority. Like a government.
Yes, and where government doesn't exist to grant said charter with limitations, groups of people will form their own entity and might will make right. Hope you're a shareholder.
Voluntary transactions requires an offer of greater value to entice agreement. Involuntary transactions can resort to strongarm tactics, and so offering greater value is a lesser concern and often skipped. .
Taxation is a voluntary transaction for me, and I have the ability (and right) to be represented in the decision making process that leads to it, de jure anyway. De facto is admittedly a different scenario.
I pay taxes so that I will have a better infrastructure where I live. Living in Seattle, Washington, southern Oregon, and northwest Arkansas, I will choose taxation over not, and gladly.
I understand that you are individually speaking impacted by taxes, but you are at least represented in that decision making process (again, de jure)
Where there is not strong government to contest the power of Corporations, they can and will exercise their power extrajudiciously. They will not be bound by law. They will shit in the water, they will shit in the air, they will put a bullet in your kid's head for getting too close to their transport truck. They WILL. They DO. I understand the need and desire for a strongly controlled government, I really do... but a weak one? That terrifies me.
That is why I added the caveat of: "the resulting product is worth [more_than_value]".
I have no intention of addressing failed business models, in Government or any other business. I'm addressing the fallacious claim that Government cannot create wealth, that it just redistributes it. Any argument for that applies equally to a large number of powerful corporations.
I will definitely concede the great point you've made about bankruptcy- Government certainly has a favorable stance with regard to its business, but I think I'd prefer it that way. Improved electoral processes could curb that.
The monopoly you cite on violent force is only a monopoly in recent times. In ye olden days (100 years ago, and less in cases), violent force has been employed with impunity by corporate entities. In my eye, the Government is simply the biggest Corporation on the block, and one we're lucky enough to be able to vote for representation in (ignoring the obvious problems with the electoral process in the US)
Correct, my local government does grant that monopoly.
But don't think they did it without being asked/persuaded (corruption) to.
In the complete absence of a representative government, that I can at least vote for, a corporation would form to serve its same function, without representation. We saw this with the earliest corporate charters in the early Age of Exploration empires. We saw this in the West in the US, even. Where there is a power void, something will fill it. Corporations (large groups of pooled resources) are powerful. Wouldn't you at least like to be able to have a say in the most powerful one overall? (Government)
If [organization] acquires [asset] for [value], hires people to do work, and the resulting product is worth [more_than_value]...
Tag brackets were probably a poor choice, there.
Not remotely relevant. If acquires for , hires people to do work, and the resulting product is worth , they have created wealth. The only real difference is who owns the generated wealth.
There's also the fact that only a fucking moron would claim one can reasonably live in modern society without being indirectly forced into purchasing quite a few products from corporations; of course, should someone do this, they won't need money for very much, and thus won't have to work, and thus won't be taxed... Shit. They really are the goddamn same. Do you know when elections are for my local power company representative?
Ah, the good ol' "We can't hire more people because we're taxed too much" argument.
Do you by any chance know a corporate, or even small-business accountant? You should ask him/her what portion of revenue tax is paid on.
This is, unless of course, you're speaking of FICA withholding, which doesn't go to these sorts of programs, at all.
They argue that the government has to take resources from someone else in order to pay that person.
Fuck, which is it.. Are they printing it, or stealing it?
And furthermore, I'd like to figure out how these companies that are hiring people are doing so without obtaining that money from someone else.
Adorable. Like a White House press secretary, you do a little spin, and now the topic is so fucking confused that no one knows what they were even saying before the drivel spewed forth. I salute you. Hey, aren't you the tool who tried to expand his link-farm business into Wikipedia, and actively promotes paid-for PR editing? You're my hero, man.
My point exactly.
Shaking it at the darker-skinned, more advanced people who repeatedly pounded their inferior barbarian asses into the dirt for a couple thousand years?
How quickly we all want to forget where we came from. If the white race is superior in intelligence due to evolution, then the trait cropped up sometime in very, very recent history. More likely, the white race is just the newest ethnic empire to rise from the ashes of its predecessors. And as is human nature, whoever succeeds them will likely look down on them as inferior barbarians, while thinking that they have been superior all along.
Lack of counterpoint is not a point.
Until they became aware of someone making non-sequitur conclusions from/and using their work as "proof"?
Shocking.
I'd like to think the merit of the argument stands on its own legs, regardless of the name or anonymity of the poster. Unless of course you're attempt to debunk his argument by virtue of that facet.. In which case, +1 Ironic. I like your sense of humor.
Or it's a rebuttal that his conclusions are non-sequitur with regard to the evidence he (they) provided.
Someone displays evidence of a statistical correlation between serum lead levels, and violence.
I then postulate that they have proven that GM is responsible for the high violence rates during the time tetraethyllead was in use in gasoline.
Am I right? Maybe. But the evidence certainly can't be used to reach that conclusion.
Wrong. They're saying the conclusions drawn from the research are incorrect. That it's non-sequitur.
Do you suffer from a reading comprehension problem, or is cognitive dissonance compelling you to throw yourself upon the saber of false assertions to prevent your world-view from imploding?
It would, if black people living in northern latitudes didn't get enough sunlight to generate the requisite amount of Vitamin D. That is however nowhere near the case.
Unless of course those black ancestors of the europeans invented the office job and couldn't get their asses outside for a few minutes a few days a week, or slathered themselves in sunscreen, or hid behind UV-filtering glass.
That must be it- it completely explains why Northern/Southern native Americans and siberian tribes have such pale skin!
Or... genetic drift.
Very true. Mostly because they were wearing loincloths while the older empires were playing with siege weaponry.
Great civilizations are not a white invention, we were simply the last to enter the game, and won out against our ailing competitors.
The next age won't be ours though, that much is certain. I wonder if in the future, people will argue that white people are an inferior race since all the great civilizations will likely exist in Asia
He IS, and for precisely the reason you say. His IQ is probably more affected by him being an introverted autodidact than genetics. Very intelligent people can bomb IQ tests, and some people who would largely be regarded as "dumb" can ace them. It's not unheard of for introverted autodidacts to emerge from impoverished families, of all "races".
Of course, given his lack of any form of deductive reasoning past step 1, I'm going to conclude that he simply isn't as smart as he thinks he is.
Or it indicates that you or the source of that information is utterly full of shit. Sounds like an urban myth, to me.