Hmm... Corporations must have at least three member. They are a President, a Vice President, and a Treasurer.
Those are employees of the corporation, not the corporation itself. It's quite possible that none of the three share in the aggregated capital, so they can not be of the corporation.
Officers of a corporation are not the corporation. The registered agent of a corporation is not the corporation. You could say the shareholders ARE the corporation, but it's possible to have all the shares in a corporation owned by another corporation. In fact, it's not uncommon to have several layers of this type of structure.
Corporations are people just as much as Unions are people.
If you think that, then you don't know the definition of "corporation" or "union".
A corporation is nothing but aggregated capital. It doesn't even have to be capital owned by a human being. It just has to be capital. Only capital and a document. Many corporations are owned by other corporations. The closest human being is several layers removed.
Whereas, a union is nothing more than workers who bargain collectively. There are no unions without people, but there are corporations without people.
See, this notion that somehow unions and corporations are morally equivalent was just a Heritage Foundation response to the public dissatisfaction with the Citizens United case. It was always just misdirection.
The Constitution refers to "We the People of the United States..." There is no reference to the people of China. And the rights under the Constitution should not be asserted as to belong to anyone other than a US citizen.
There is also no reference in the Constitution to the government of Israel, or Fox News (owned by an Australian and a Saudi national). You don't see them getting busted for spreading propaganda. Hell, they don't even have to register as foreign lobbyists.
I'll bet the SJWs are gonna force Star Trek to have like a female captain or a black guy playing a Klingon or something equally ridiculous and only tell stories that have social commentary. They'll totally ruin it, ya know? Effing SJWs ruin all the stuff we love.
The problem with that, is that 'respectful behavior' is a constantly moving target. What is respectful in one culture, may not be in another. Or to another person.
Again, the key is listening.
If you're not a jerk (and I don't mean you specifically), you would be surprised at the amount of latitude and understanding people give you. Everybody knows what passive-aggressive behavior sounds like. And you know how miserable it is to deal with someone who is passive-aggressive towards you.
The same way, it's pretty clear what micro-aggressions sound like, even when written. And, it depends on the audience. If you're with your mates, and you want to talk about how good his grandma is in bed, that's one thing. And if your mate says, "Look man, my grandma's been sick and I don't want you to talk about her", that's another. Now, if you want to be decent, you take him at his word and lay off. If you respond with, "U WOT M8? R U SOME KINDA SENSITIVE SUSAN WHO DOESN'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT HIS GRAN GIVING HEAD? EFF OFF", then you might not be a respectful person.
I'm a complete goof, and in my line of work I deal with all sorts of people who might be sensitive, from different cultures, different political persuasions, even radical feminists and SJWs. You would be surprised at how much people will let slide if you're not a total knob, and if your contribution to the group is meaningful.
"Respectful" being subjective is a feature, not a bug. But you have to care a little bit about other people to make it work.
However it won't be me pointing a finger and brandishing a copy of the CoC to get someone drummed out of town. In my view the sort of person who will use this will typically have an arcanely complex definition of respectful behaviour, doubtless involving odd new pronouns I've only vaguely heard of.
And yet, many people are able to participate in online forums without getting banned.
I simply cannot see how having a code of conduct based on treating other people in a respectful manner will result in discouraging desirable developers and companies from joining the community.
Just read the comments to this story. You'll get the picture.
"Those people who are complaining about bullying really need to have their asses kicked!"
Why? why should anyone just be given something when they choose not to contribute in any way? Why should people doing the right thing by producing something of value and taking care of themselves ALSO shoulder the burden of taking care of someone else?
Well mate, it has something to do with morality. Advanced societies believe it's better to take care of each other, because, believe it or not, most of us are going to someday be in a position where we're not "producing" anything of value and we're going to need someone to take care of us. We were all there once as children and with luck, we'll all be there again in old age.
And where did you get the notion that "producing something of value" is the measure of a person's worth? What damage was done to you to make you believe this? Are your parents still alive, because I'd like to have a talk with them and find out how they raised you.
My goodness, how the Calvinist/Puritan/Protestant "work ethic" has fucked with people's moral compasses. Greed is considered good and taking care of people in need is considered suspect. Jesus wept.
You think only "tiny percentage" will be on the dole if we expand benefits? In the US right now, 59 million people are on "disability" payments from the taxpayer, and it is known that many of these so-called "disabilities" are a pure scam.
Disability isn't welfare. It's insurance. And "known" to whom? To you? You know somebody on disability who doesn't deserve it? One of your mates? You?
Right now, 46 million Americans are on food stamps due to recruitment efforts by the government.
Food stamps is hardly the dole. It comes to what, about $100/month? Nobody lives on food stamps. Nobody doesn't work because they get food stamps.
The parasites are far more than a "tiny percentage".
No, it's a tiny percentage. In fact, it's how they got the name "the 1%".
At my house, we just do a live re-enactment of the the music video for Bleed by Meshuggah. I don't just want the kids scared, I want them to walk away from my house with PTSD.
Absolutely true. I can still point out the house in our neighbourhood that in 1973 (and only for one year) gave out full-size chocolate bars.
I'm the opposite. I can still point out the house in our old neighborhood that gave out miniature Bit-O-Honeys. Or at least I could if I hadn't gone back and burned it down 10 years later.
The investigation didn't turn up any signs of foul play, mostly because the police and firemen are about the same age and probably got Bit-O-Honey pieces, too.
Trust me: when you're in the Wal-Mart buying Halloween candy, back away from the Bit-O-Honey.
Seriously. Go down to costco. Buy 10 boxes of full sized candies. It will cost you $200. Much less than a lot of crappy Halloween decorations. I guarantee you, the kids will remember. Often into adulthood. "There was this one house that gave out full sized bars!"
Listen to the man. You think you're gonna save money by buying cheap bags of Bit-O-Honey pieces, but the kids remember that stuff and you'll end up paying in the number of eggs you'll have to clean off your house and the toilet paper in your trees. Not to mention the eternal ill-will of 8 year-olds that are soon going to be entering their prime hoodlum years (puberty).
We did the full-size bars last night and the few dozen kids we got all gave me the "good lookin' out, Pops" look as they left my front porch. My wife wanted to make homemade candies and hand them out (she's from Europe), but I put the kibosh on that real quick, because here in the US, we only trust candy that comes from the biggest multi-national corporations, made in labs that carefully sequester peanuts.
On the whole, the night was a big success and it was all over in plenty of time for us to sit in front of the fireplace and watch the Bob Ross marathon on Twitch TV.
With $12K/yr you could live in a one bedroom apartment in Sacramento, California.
Unless you're willing to live on the South or West side of Sacramento, your one bedroom is gonna cost you about $800/mo. You gonna eat and have electricity, hot water and be able to buy soap for $200/mo?
Slashdot Mirror
Listening always helps.
Those are employees of the corporation, not the corporation itself. It's quite possible that none of the three share in the aggregated capital, so they can not be of the corporation.
Officers of a corporation are not the corporation. The registered agent of a corporation is not the corporation. You could say the shareholders ARE the corporation, but it's possible to have all the shares in a corporation owned by another corporation. In fact, it's not uncommon to have several layers of this type of structure.
There can be corporations without human beings.
My favorite Yogi quote is, "You can observe a lot by watching".
If you think that, then you don't know the definition of "corporation" or "union".
A corporation is nothing but aggregated capital. It doesn't even have to be capital owned by a human being. It just has to be capital. Only capital and a document. Many corporations are owned by other corporations. The closest human being is several layers removed.
Whereas, a union is nothing more than workers who bargain collectively. There are no unions without people, but there are corporations without people.
See, this notion that somehow unions and corporations are morally equivalent was just a Heritage Foundation response to the public dissatisfaction with the Citizens United case. It was always just misdirection.
There is also no reference in the Constitution to the government of Israel, or Fox News (owned by an Australian and a Saudi national). You don't see them getting busted for spreading propaganda. Hell, they don't even have to register as foreign lobbyists.
Can you imagine how bad the original Star Trek would have been if SJWs had been involved?
http://heydeadguy.typepad.com/...
You're right. We'll see how it works out. If the place empties out, then people will go a different way.
I'll bet the SJWs are gonna force Star Trek to have like a female captain or a black guy playing a Klingon or something equally ridiculous and only tell stories that have social commentary. They'll totally ruin it, ya know? Effing SJWs ruin all the stuff we love.
Again, the key is listening.
If you're not a jerk (and I don't mean you specifically), you would be surprised at the amount of latitude and understanding people give you. Everybody knows what passive-aggressive behavior sounds like. And you know how miserable it is to deal with someone who is passive-aggressive towards you.
The same way, it's pretty clear what micro-aggressions sound like, even when written. And, it depends on the audience. If you're with your mates, and you want to talk about how good his grandma is in bed, that's one thing. And if your mate says, "Look man, my grandma's been sick and I don't want you to talk about her", that's another. Now, if you want to be decent, you take him at his word and lay off. If you respond with, "U WOT M8? R U SOME KINDA SENSITIVE SUSAN WHO DOESN'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT HIS GRAN GIVING HEAD? EFF OFF", then you might not be a respectful person.
I'm a complete goof, and in my line of work I deal with all sorts of people who might be sensitive, from different cultures, different political persuasions, even radical feminists and SJWs. You would be surprised at how much people will let slide if you're not a total knob, and if your contribution to the group is meaningful.
"Respectful" being subjective is a feature, not a bug. But you have to care a little bit about other people to make it work.
And yet, many people are able to participate in online forums without getting banned.
If you don't know what constitutes respectful behavior, then maybe you weren't brought up right. I don't mean you specifically, of course.
This is where listening comes in handy. It's kind of a lost art.
Just read the comments to this story. You'll get the picture.
"Those people who are complaining about bullying really need to have their asses kicked!"
I'm less concerned about the threats from outer space than I am about the catastrophe we will cause ourselves.
http://graphics.latimes.com/ex...
Well mate, it has something to do with morality. Advanced societies believe it's better to take care of each other, because, believe it or not, most of us are going to someday be in a position where we're not "producing" anything of value and we're going to need someone to take care of us. We were all there once as children and with luck, we'll all be there again in old age.
And where did you get the notion that "producing something of value" is the measure of a person's worth? What damage was done to you to make you believe this? Are your parents still alive, because I'd like to have a talk with them and find out how they raised you.
My goodness, how the Calvinist/Puritan/Protestant "work ethic" has fucked with people's moral compasses. Greed is considered good and taking care of people in need is considered suspect. Jesus wept.
Disability isn't welfare. It's insurance. And "known" to whom? To you? You know somebody on disability who doesn't deserve it? One of your mates? You?
Food stamps is hardly the dole. It comes to what, about $100/month? Nobody lives on food stamps. Nobody doesn't work because they get food stamps.
No, it's a tiny percentage. In fact, it's how they got the name "the 1%".
There's economic evidence that executing the rich would actually be more effective.
But it would be wrong, m'kay?
Why the long face?
And notably, during that time zero other companies offered her the CEO position.
It's not impossible for a single disastrous CEO to bring a company down for a decade.
I want to know what it means for my TI-83.
Turn, turn, turn.
At my house, we just do a live re-enactment of the the music video for Bleed by Meshuggah. I don't just want the kids scared, I want them to walk away from my house with PTSD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Anybody who goes to that much effort and expense to get kids to come to his house needs to be on the registry of sex offenders.
No offense.
I'm the opposite. I can still point out the house in our old neighborhood that gave out miniature Bit-O-Honeys. Or at least I could if I hadn't gone back and burned it down 10 years later.
The investigation didn't turn up any signs of foul play, mostly because the police and firemen are about the same age and probably got Bit-O-Honey pieces, too.
Trust me: when you're in the Wal-Mart buying Halloween candy, back away from the Bit-O-Honey.
Listen to the man. You think you're gonna save money by buying cheap bags of Bit-O-Honey pieces, but the kids remember that stuff and you'll end up paying in the number of eggs you'll have to clean off your house and the toilet paper in your trees. Not to mention the eternal ill-will of 8 year-olds that are soon going to be entering their prime hoodlum years (puberty).
We did the full-size bars last night and the few dozen kids we got all gave me the "good lookin' out, Pops" look as they left my front porch. My wife wanted to make homemade candies and hand them out (she's from Europe), but I put the kibosh on that real quick, because here in the US, we only trust candy that comes from the biggest multi-national corporations, made in labs that carefully sequester peanuts.
On the whole, the night was a big success and it was all over in plenty of time for us to sit in front of the fireplace and watch the Bob Ross marathon on Twitch TV.
Unless you're willing to live on the South or West side of Sacramento, your one bedroom is gonna cost you about $800/mo. You gonna eat and have electricity, hot water and be able to buy soap for $200/mo?
It's cutting it pretty close.