You seem to have a very wrong (albeit common) view of how the constitution works. The amendments don't grant us rights; they merely amend the body of the constitution. For that matter the constitution doesn't grant us rights either. We, as human beings, simply have the rights. Rather, the constitution creates a federal government to handle matters that are better handled by it than by the states.
Constitutions and Bills of rights do not grant us what rights we have, they determine what rights can be taken away and how.
This is one of the reasons I believe Australia will be no better off having a codified "bill of rights" as we are still dependent on the government de jour to enforce that bill. Meaning if a government is going to ignore our un-explicitly granted rights (currently our five fundamental freedoms), they will ignore our explicitly granted rights just as easily.
Why would anyone running XP fork over the dough for a 3TB HDD? XP is 9 years old and Win7 is a very good replacement for newer machines, particularly ones who's owners might want a 3TB drive for.
Because I play games and value that 20% extra performance when playing buggy, unoptimised console ports.
XP Service Pack 3 is just over two years old (April 2008).
Even if they sell a large percentage of handsets, there aren't many people who are buying apps or particularly enthusiastic about their Nokia hardware.
Despite Nokia making a profit on every sing bit of hardware sold. Nokia is not big in the US but they own half of Asia and are well respected in Europe and Australia. The E71/72 is one of the best selling business phones in Australia and Symbian phones account for over 60 of ad traffic from Asia whilst Nokia makes up 47% of the market compared to Apple's 16%. What you'll also notice is that Apple's market share includes Ipods. Unfortunately my own nation of Australia has been skewing these statistics and for that I am deeply ashamed. Source Admob Metrics(PDF warning)
Nokia also consists of more then just mobile phones, they have significant sales in infrastructure and corporate phone systems (PBX's). Not to mention all the R&D Nokia does into telecommunications, the GSM patents Nokia has alone will keep the company well and truly afloat. Almost any phone you purchase will have hardware developed in part or in full by Nokia (including the Iphone).
So you're wrong on both counts, Nokia enjoys significant sales world wide and they aren't dependent on selling applications (although Nokia is doing quite well with Navigation since they bought Naviteq and started offering it as a subscription service on their phones).
Just out of curiosity, have you downloaded android OS, modified it and installed it on your incredible? What have you done on your incredible that can't be done on the iPhone due to it being open? Not trying to flame here, Im just curious...
I paid for an Application in the Android Marketplace, it had a few issues writing to the SD Card so I emailed support. They emailed me back a link to an unsigned beta (not in the Android Marketplace) that had corrected the issue, it installed from the web with no problems what so ever. Given that this was a thrid party email Client (Touchdown for Android), compared to the Iphone that's Incredible, but I was using it on my HTC so I'd say it was a Dream. Recently moved to a new Motorola, I'd say it was a significant Milestone.
No wait, I've got one more, I guess the Desire for Android phones is undeniable.
This is not about an iPhone app, but about a development environment to create iPhone apps. The company contacted Apple after the SDK agreement changes to determine whether there was any way they could adapt it to the new requirements, and apparently got their final rejection notice from Steve Jobs (see the fine article).
I've received a letter with the photocopied signature of former Telstra boss Sol Trujilo, that doesn't mean he signed it personally.
But that is besides the point, this is about Apple changing the rules retrospectively to specifically deny an application or function. Given that you cannot legally or easily install applications from a non-apple controlled distribution channel this is a major issue.
First, Apple is not a convicted monopolist like Microsoft, second, I don't think this move is cool either, but it's totally legal.
Neither were Microsoft back in the 80's. I love the knee jerk fanboy response "but Microsoft is a Monopoly" argument as it completely ignores that Apple is doing the same things that Microsoft did before it was convicted as an abusive monopoly. Fanboys, you must also include the word "abusive" as that is the operative word, MS wasn't convicted of being a monopoly, that is 100% legal. Microsoft was convicted of abusing their monopoly position not of being a monopoly.
The date on the conviction is 5 November 1999, which means MS had over 10 years of being abusive before they were actually convicted of it, date is on the first page of that very link you posted.
And the people who design cars wouldn't have money to keep designing cars. And all of the advancement and innovation that we've seen since the first car would continue because people like to do things like this, it's not always about the pay cheque.
There, fixed that for you.
Just think, if everyone had a universal constructor what need would there be for money? In a land of no scarcity there is no expensive goods to trade for other expensive goods, you simply create what ever you needed/wanted so people will create new things because they want new things, because they have good ideas and most importantly because they can. People don't design cars just for the money, they do it because they like it. Most creators/inventors create for the love of creation first, making money off it is an added benefit.
Frankly I'm tired of this idea that money is the only reason people do anything, I doubt many inventors has held this belief which is why they so often die poor.
Actually I've found the US immigration and border patrol people you meet in Canada are generally very good and, as long as you do you best to follow the rules, they have all been very helpful.
The problem with the US Customs/TSA is that they have no mandate on what they cannot do. Yes you should follow the rules when going through any nations customs procedure but that procedure should be clearly spelled out for both sides. In Australia AQIS (Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service) has a clear mandate on what they are looking for, you also have a legal responsibility to declare everything that is classified as a Dutiable good, Excisable good or Prohibited (or restricted) good as well as various questions about you and your travels (health, last point of departure, if you've been in certain specified countries, all of this is on the arrival card you fill out). It is a crime under Australian law to refuse to answer any legal questions, but this is the same law that prevents AQIS from asking illegal questions. The US needs to make a law restricting the power of Customs so they can do their job (protecting America's borders) without abusing the rights of US citizens and visitors.
They really know how to shake people up and intimidate you. Sounds almost as bad as my trip through United States customs coming back from vacation. They abducted me for three hours as I was forced to stand in line awaiting inspection and approval. They called it standard processing but I tell you what--it was more of a death march.
AQIS (Australian Quarantine and Inspection Services) nor Customs do not operate with Carte Blanc like the US's TSA. Once back in Australia (you've gotten passed passport control) you have a legal recourse against AQIS and Customs as you would against the regular police force (Customs and AQIS are part of the Australian Federal Police or AFP). This also means that AQIS and Customs are bound by the rules of the AFP when dealing with the public. You cant be picked up and thrown in a room for three hours without cause, if AQIS confiscates or breaks any of your belongings you get a receipt of sorts.
Section 195 of the Australian Customs act on 1905 describes what AQIS is mandated to do. This also outlines your responsibilities under Australian law, refusal to answer any legal question is an offence, deliberately providing an incorrect answer is an offence under the same law that protects you from AQIS and the AFP.
For example, asking "If you have been to South America in the last six months" is a legal question and you must answer truthfully, but asking "if you had sex on holiday" is an illegal question (also sexual harassment, doubly bad for the AFP) and you should rightfully refuse to answer that specific question with something like "I believe that question is not part of your mandate". Most customs officials will make small talk ("what hotel did you stay at", "was it a nice place" and "did you enjoy your holiday") but this is mostly to put you at ease as they rifle through your luggage and to gauge if you're lying. Adults should be able to use their judgement when answering these questions. AQIS in Australia are more concerned with finding fruit, drugs, weapons and pests then "terrorists" for the most part but for some reason they always take exception to my guitar case when I go through customs (maybe I just dont look like a muso).
No, it's an absolutely accurate statement of fact. The fact that you are unaware of this simple, basic, obvious fact yet have the audacity to whine that reality isn't what you want it to be says all we really need to know about you, now doesn't it
The Nazis were socialists.
No more than the people's democratic republic of Germany was run by the people, democratic in nature, or a republic. Names are often chosen as intentional lies. This tactic is often used to fools the most ignorant and reactionary members of a population..yourself in this case.
Fascism, along with all other left-wing ideologies, promotes the power of the group over the freedom of the individual.
So all you've managed to do is fall for the Statist's current tactic of completely redefining right, left, and liberalism in order to pretend that right is liberal, liberal doesn't exist and the left is nothing but all the bad parts of the left and the right. Of course, this scheme pretends the actual right doesn't exist even though it is what we're currently dealing with.
It's completely delusional, has no basis in reality and doesn't even allow you to accurately describe the current situation, since you're deeply ignorant, delusional and completely wedded to ideas which are blatant nonsense.
Right and Left are both entirely about using the power of the state against the power of the individual and *always have been*. There has never been a time when the Right been anything except
the elite using the power of the state to keep themselves in power. This is why the list of right wing governments that have ever existed is Feudalism, Theocracy, and Fascism. Those are the right wing governments and not one of them has ever had any support for individual rights or freedom because the right is violently opposed to exactly that *by definition*.
So when you spout idiotic lies demonstrating that you don't have the foggiest idea what the terms you're misusing actually mean, you have to understand that all the intelligent, informed citizens are going to hold you in the deepest contempt.
When you do that in exactly the way promoted by the current rabidly anti-American, fascist scum actively working to undermine every decent thing this country ever stood for, that is to say *Liberalism*, which is neither Left nor Right because both the Left and the Right despise the idea of individual liberty it clearly demonstrates your deep ignorance of basic definitions and your wholehearted swallowing of really stupid, bullshit propaganda and blatant lies.
Parent makes some very good points and should not be censored because certain individuals disagree with them.
Which means the scholarly political spectrum leaves most political positions off of the spectrum completely. A spectrum with communism on one end and fascism on the other end is like having a rainbow with violet on one end and blue on the other.
Only for your twisted view of the political spectrum.
Fascism is enforced capitalism, Communism is enforced socialism. Don't get the two confused because they are both enforced (authoritarian). You get hung up on the word socialist, which in German has a slightly different meaning where the key component of National Socialist party is the word National as in Nationalism, which is an extremist right wing philosophy promoting the superiority of ones own nation/ethnicity over that of all others. Deutschland Uber Alles, in case you don't remember means Germany Over All (others). As others have stated, the Nazi party was socialist in name only, much like the Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea) is democratic in name only.
Remember that the political spectrum is two dimensional, with Socialist to Capitalist on one axis and Anarchy to Police State on the other. Fascism and Communism both go to Police State but Fascims goes to the capitalist side (capitalist police state) and Communism goes to the Socialist side (socialist police state).
Both fascists and communists emphasize the good of the group (as defined by the Party) over the good of the individual (as defined by the individual).
Except the party in Fascism is a very small group at the top as compared to the party in Communism as the entire population.
Fascism as Mussolini and Hitler implemented it is really a state run as a corporation, you have the directors that get almost all the benefits, the shareholders that get a few benefits and the workers, who get none. Remember the inner sanctum was made up by the captains of German industry (willing or not), the likes of Ferdinand Porsche and Alfred Krupp.
Put simply, in Communism the whole must work for the benefit of all, shared equally, in Fascism the whole must work for the benefit of the few, shared disproportionately. The free market never stopped in Nazi Germany, welfare was not increased beyond that of the Weirmar republic, you worked, you got paid and if you were an aryan who owned a business you got perks. If you would prefer I have the following Cow analogy:
COMMUNISM:
You have two cows
The government takes both and gives you some milk
FASCISM
You have two cows
The government takes both and sells you some milk.
Really, Microsoft was a monopolist in the 80's (or even early 90's).
Did you even bother to read my post before spouting that knee-jerk and poorly thought out bit of inaccurate fanboy propaganda. Microsoft was not bought up on Monopoly charges until 1998, they were not convicted of being an abusive monopoly until 5 November 1999. You're over a decade out.
I think I missed it.
I suspect you miss quite a bit.
The thing is, Apple is doing now exactly what Microsoft did back in the 80's to become an abusive monopoly. They are using their dominant position in the Audio Player space to force consumers into their other offerings (I.E. you have to own a Mac in order to develop for the Iphone). Apple are also trying to take over standards like HTML 5 before it becomes a standard so everyone has to use Apple's implementation, this is exactly what MS did with IE but worse, MS never stopped me from installing Netscape on Windows, they only made IE the default browser without asking.
Apple is definitely abusing antitrust but seems to be getting a free ride from fanboys.
Nor, of course, were/are most of the countries we describe as 'Communist'.
I guess I go by the traditional definition of Communist (As penned my Marx). Not that I disagree with you, communism tends to create a classes society despite all attempts to the contrary, which is the point of Animal Farm (at least the point I pulled out of Animal Farm).
There is nothing sadder then an American pretending to be someone else.
I'm not from the Eastern Bloc (yes you misspelled it and that's what they actually call it) but I know a fair few people from Russia, Latvia, Poland and the former Yugoslavia (a lot of Macedonian came to Australia after the fall of communism). What you say is complete and utter nonsense. The US had nothing to do with the fall of the Eastern Bloc it was 1. dissent from inside the eastern block against the soviets (most notably Hungary and Yugoslavia (Tito)) and 2. poor Soviet economic planning going back to Stalin's policies post WWII. The US had absolutely nothing to do with the fall of Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc, get a grip, get some perspective and for $DEITIES sake man, get a sense of humour.
Also almost all Eastern Europeans learned British English (En_UK), so reflect on that before trying this stunt again.
whoever modded this insightful also needs a grip, perspective and a sense of humour.
I don't see how "1984" is a diatribe against fascism.
Do you know what Fascism is?
Double-thinking, rewriting history and language, surveying and controlling people's lives in detail
You've just described Totalitarianism, which comes in many forms including Communist and Fascist.
The critical difference you've missed is that like all fascist governments, the society in 1984 is a rigidly enforced class based system which is the antithesis of Communism which is an enforced classless system (which doesn't work, which was the point of Animal Farm). Fascism is very much about controlling how people think and feel, so much so that one of O'briens lines in the book is "we will eliminate the orgasm" which is to extend total control over the human body itself.
The society in 1984 has three distinct classes, this alone means it is not Communism. The inner party has all the rights, the outer party has few rights but a few benefits and the proles have none and are kept completely demoralised. It is made clear when Winston talks to O'brien that the entire society works for the betterment and empowerment of the few at the top (the Inner Party members) who's main goal is keep themselves in power. This is typical of Fascist governments, whilst the people fight and eat rations the upper echelons dine well. This is why Mussolini said, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power". Fascism is about the centralisation of power, not the empowerment of all (which is communism, in theory)
1948 would be an odd time to be writing diatribes against Nazis.
It was published in 1948, it was written before then with the ideas Orwell had during the war. The likes of Lord Haw Haw being the model. In 1948 there was still a significant Fascist presence in England (I think this is where most yanks go wrong with 1948, it was written by an Englishman. No offence to Americans of course, I love you like brothers). In Europe the ideas of perpetual war to keep the masses in line and ensure continuing leadership always belonged to the extremist right (fascism is an extremist right philosophy).
Where the direct comparison between 1984 and Fascism begins is in the party structure. In 1984 you had three levels, the Inner party who had rights and decided things for everyone else (this is a direct link to the inner Nazi Party). Then you have the outer party members, those considered pure enough to have responsibilities and benefits but not able to make real deceptions about their life (these are the Aryans and upper class German citizens). Finally you have the Proles, no rights, no responsibilities and kept completely demoralised (the average German). Fascist governments always end up with at least these three basic groups and maintained a very rigid structure. Also the types of propaganda used in 1984 were very much like that produced by Nazi Germany, an external group were always blamed for internal problems like the Jews in Nazi Germany (Goldstein is a Jewish sounding name).
1984 was a tract against totalitarianism in general.
But to be more specific, Fascist totalitarianism which as I said was a big fear in 40's England, especially by liberals (as in liberalism, free thinkers) of the time. Orwell did fit in with this group. Fascism is about enforcement of a rigid classed society, which was the society depicted in 1984. In Europe at the time, fascism was still as much of a threat as communism.
User: Oh hey, I'm going to cruise to Starbucks and get some work done. *meanders on to Starbucks with netbook/phone bundle, sits down, opens SSH connection* *receives phone call* User: Oh fuck... Sure hope you nohup'd that last command before you pull out your internet connection to take a call, buddy.
Reaches over and presses the "accept call" button on the desktop only to hear your wife start to complain at you through the laptop speakers and wonders what the hell am I doing in a starbucks, I like real coffee.
Um...Did you RTFB? It had everything to do with rewriting history. "We've always been at war with Eastasia." It was a reference to the actions of Stalin's regime. Hence the famous pictures of Stalin with the guys airbrushed out once they became persona non grata.
1984 was Orwell's diatribe against Fascism (Nazism specifically).
Animal Farm was Orwell's diatribe against Communism, Napoleon played the role of Stalin, Snowball played Leon Trotsky and other purged party members. There was a reason Orwell used Trotsky pigs and mentioned them specifically throughout the book. Dogs were the KGB, Boxer was the unthinking average citizen.
Just like here in Australia where Vodafone have been "planning" to release this phone since it was frigging announced. I got sick of waiting so I checked out google's online store. "This product is not available in your location". Well great. Thanks a lot. Spent my money on beer instead.
Bosh. I paid for my Nexus One outright, and I probably wouldn't have even looked at it if I had to stop in at one of the phone stores. Those places are sleazy.
Google's biggest mistake was only selling the N1 in the US where people don't like buying a phone outright. The demand from Europe, Australia and Asia was fairly high compared to the US but we had to wait for 3rd party resellers to get it and then pay a premium (US$520 != A$900 at a 0.9:1 exchange rate). They should have made more deals with carriers, personally I'd prefer the N1 over a Desire as I like the vanilla Android interface over HTC Sense as of right now I can only get the Desire in Australia from a carrier (but then again I bought a Milestone (GSM Droid) outright for A$550).
It's unfortunate that Google is throwing in the towel so quickly. They're spending fortunes on ads, right now, they must have the money to spare.
Google understands the Sunk Cost fallacy, they realise that they don't have the expertise and resources to maintain a retail front for one product and that it would be far easier to let 3rd parties such as existing phone retailers and carriers to sell the product. This store pretty much fell into the "too hard" and "too expensive" basket.
Google clearly did not have the experience nessasary to deal directly with the public (and I'm an Android fan). Google has realised this and rather then trying to haphazardly throw money at it to fix it they've written it off as a bad idea and terminated it. Google can still get the N1 (N2 and N3) out there, but through intermediaries who are set up to deal with the public.
But I do love my Android phone. It could stand minor hardware tweaking. The software resources are phenomenal.
Having owned a HTC Dream and Motorola Milestone as well as having several mates with N1's I'm confident to say that Android is going from strength to strength.
but if you look at the specs, Mac machines aren't that much more expensive than their PC counterparts spec-wise.
Apple uses 5400 RPM hard drives. 7200 RPM hard drives are now standard on Dell Vostro's. For the same configuration you will pay at least A$500 less for a Dell with NBD on-site support then you will for a Macbook except the dell will have standardised display ports.
Slashdot Mirror
Constitutions and Bills of rights do not grant us what rights we have, they determine what rights can be taken away and how.
This is one of the reasons I believe Australia will be no better off having a codified "bill of rights" as we are still dependent on the government de jour to enforce that bill. Meaning if a government is going to ignore our un-explicitly granted rights (currently our five fundamental freedoms), they will ignore our explicitly granted rights just as easily.
Because I play games and value that 20% extra performance when playing buggy, unoptimised console ports.
XP Service Pack 3 is just over two years old (April 2008).
Got any evidence to go with that assertion.
Despite Nokia making a profit on every sing bit of hardware sold. Nokia is not big in the US but they own half of Asia and are well respected in Europe and Australia. The E71/72 is one of the best selling business phones in Australia and Symbian phones account for over 60 of ad traffic from Asia whilst Nokia makes up 47% of the market compared to Apple's 16%. What you'll also notice is that Apple's market share includes Ipods. Unfortunately my own nation of Australia has been skewing these statistics and for that I am deeply ashamed. Source Admob Metrics(PDF warning)
Nokia also consists of more then just mobile phones, they have significant sales in infrastructure and corporate phone systems (PBX's). Not to mention all the R&D Nokia does into telecommunications, the GSM patents Nokia has alone will keep the company well and truly afloat. Almost any phone you purchase will have hardware developed in part or in full by Nokia (including the Iphone).
So you're wrong on both counts, Nokia enjoys significant sales world wide and they aren't dependent on selling applications (although Nokia is doing quite well with Navigation since they bought Naviteq and started offering it as a subscription service on their phones).
I paid for an Application in the Android Marketplace, it had a few issues writing to the SD Card so I emailed support. They emailed me back a link to an unsigned beta (not in the Android Marketplace) that had corrected the issue, it installed from the web with no problems what so ever. Given that this was a thrid party email Client (Touchdown for Android), compared to the Iphone that's Incredible, but I was using it on my HTC so I'd say it was a Dream. Recently moved to a new Motorola, I'd say it was a significant Milestone.
No wait, I've got one more, I guess the Desire for Android phones is undeniable.
I've received a letter with the photocopied signature of former Telstra boss Sol Trujilo, that doesn't mean he signed it personally.
But that is besides the point, this is about Apple changing the rules retrospectively to specifically deny an application or function. Given that you cannot legally or easily install applications from a non-apple controlled distribution channel this is a major issue.
Lets compare OS's to OS's that have actually been released.
Iphone OS and WinMo 6, WinMo 6 has no such restrictions, I can run unsigned code on any WinMo 6 device.
Iphone OS and Symbian S60, Symbian S60 has no such restrictions, I can run unsigned code on any S60 device.
Iphone OS and Android, Android has no such restrictions, I can run unsigned code on any Android device.
Neither were Microsoft back in the 80's. I love the knee jerk fanboy response "but Microsoft is a Monopoly" argument as it completely ignores that Apple is doing the same things that Microsoft did before it was convicted as an abusive monopoly. Fanboys, you must also include the word "abusive" as that is the operative word, MS wasn't convicted of being a monopoly, that is 100% legal. Microsoft was convicted of abusing their monopoly position not of being a monopoly.
The date on the conviction is 5 November 1999, which means MS had over 10 years of being abusive before they were actually convicted of it, date is on the first page of that very link you posted.
Ha,
That's gold Jerry, Gold.
There, fixed that for you.
Just think, if everyone had a universal constructor what need would there be for money? In a land of no scarcity there is no expensive goods to trade for other expensive goods, you simply create what ever you needed/wanted so people will create new things because they want new things, because they have good ideas and most importantly because they can. People don't design cars just for the money, they do it because they like it. Most creators/inventors create for the love of creation first, making money off it is an added benefit.
Frankly I'm tired of this idea that money is the only reason people do anything, I doubt many inventors has held this belief which is why they so often die poor.
The problem with the US Customs/TSA is that they have no mandate on what they cannot do. Yes you should follow the rules when going through any nations customs procedure but that procedure should be clearly spelled out for both sides. In Australia AQIS (Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service) has a clear mandate on what they are looking for, you also have a legal responsibility to declare everything that is classified as a Dutiable good, Excisable good or Prohibited (or restricted) good as well as various questions about you and your travels (health, last point of departure, if you've been in certain specified countries, all of this is on the arrival card you fill out). It is a crime under Australian law to refuse to answer any legal questions, but this is the same law that prevents AQIS from asking illegal questions. The US needs to make a law restricting the power of Customs so they can do their job (protecting America's borders) without abusing the rights of US citizens and visitors.
AQIS (Australian Quarantine and Inspection Services) nor Customs do not operate with Carte Blanc like the US's TSA. Once back in Australia (you've gotten passed passport control) you have a legal recourse against AQIS and Customs as you would against the regular police force (Customs and AQIS are part of the Australian Federal Police or AFP). This also means that AQIS and Customs are bound by the rules of the AFP when dealing with the public. You cant be picked up and thrown in a room for three hours without cause, if AQIS confiscates or breaks any of your belongings you get a receipt of sorts.
Section 195 of the Australian Customs act on 1905 describes what AQIS is mandated to do. This also outlines your responsibilities under Australian law, refusal to answer any legal question is an offence, deliberately providing an incorrect answer is an offence under the same law that protects you from AQIS and the AFP.
For example, asking "If you have been to South America in the last six months" is a legal question and you must answer truthfully, but asking "if you had sex on holiday" is an illegal question (also sexual harassment, doubly bad for the AFP) and you should rightfully refuse to answer that specific question with something like "I believe that question is not part of your mandate". Most customs officials will make small talk ("what hotel did you stay at", "was it a nice place" and "did you enjoy your holiday") but this is mostly to put you at ease as they rifle through your luggage and to gauge if you're lying. Adults should be able to use their judgement when answering these questions. AQIS in Australia are more concerned with finding fruit, drugs, weapons and pests then "terrorists" for the most part but for some reason they always take exception to my guitar case when I go through customs (maybe I just dont look like a muso).
Parent makes some very good points and should not be censored because certain individuals disagree with them.
Only for your twisted view of the political spectrum.
Fascism is enforced capitalism, Communism is enforced socialism. Don't get the two confused because they are both enforced (authoritarian). You get hung up on the word socialist, which in German has a slightly different meaning where the key component of National Socialist party is the word National as in Nationalism, which is an extremist right wing philosophy promoting the superiority of ones own nation/ethnicity over that of all others. Deutschland Uber Alles, in case you don't remember means Germany Over All (others). As others have stated, the Nazi party was socialist in name only, much like the Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea) is democratic in name only.
Remember that the political spectrum is two dimensional, with Socialist to Capitalist on one axis and Anarchy to Police State on the other. Fascism and Communism both go to Police State but Fascims goes to the capitalist side (capitalist police state) and Communism goes to the Socialist side (socialist police state).
Except the party in Fascism is a very small group at the top as compared to the party in Communism as the entire population.
Fascism as Mussolini and Hitler implemented it is really a state run as a corporation, you have the directors that get almost all the benefits, the shareholders that get a few benefits and the workers, who get none. Remember the inner sanctum was made up by the captains of German industry (willing or not), the likes of Ferdinand Porsche and Alfred Krupp.
Put simply, in Communism the whole must work for the benefit of all, shared equally, in Fascism the whole must work for the benefit of the few, shared disproportionately. The free market never stopped in Nazi Germany, welfare was not increased beyond that of the Weirmar republic, you worked, you got paid and if you were an aryan who owned a business you got perks. If you would prefer I have the following Cow analogy:
COMMUNISM:
You have two cows
The government takes both and gives you some milk
FASCISM
You have two cows
The government takes both and sells you some milk.
Really, Microsoft was a monopolist in the 80's (or even early 90's).
Did you even bother to read my post before spouting that knee-jerk and poorly thought out bit of inaccurate fanboy propaganda. Microsoft was not bought up on Monopoly charges until 1998, they were not convicted of being an abusive monopoly until 5 November 1999. You're over a decade out.
I suspect you miss quite a bit.
The thing is, Apple is doing now exactly what Microsoft did back in the 80's to become an abusive monopoly. They are using their dominant position in the Audio Player space to force consumers into their other offerings (I.E. you have to own a Mac in order to develop for the Iphone). Apple are also trying to take over standards like HTML 5 before it becomes a standard so everyone has to use Apple's implementation, this is exactly what MS did with IE but worse, MS never stopped me from installing Netscape on Windows, they only made IE the default browser without asking.
Apple is definitely abusing antitrust but seems to be getting a free ride from fanboys.
I guess I go by the traditional definition of Communist (As penned my Marx). Not that I disagree with you, communism tends to create a classes society despite all attempts to the contrary, which is the point of Animal Farm (at least the point I pulled out of Animal Farm).
There is nothing sadder then an American pretending to be someone else.
I'm not from the Eastern Bloc (yes you misspelled it and that's what they actually call it) but I know a fair few people from Russia, Latvia, Poland and the former Yugoslavia (a lot of Macedonian came to Australia after the fall of communism). What you say is complete and utter nonsense. The US had nothing to do with the fall of the Eastern Bloc it was 1. dissent from inside the eastern block against the soviets (most notably Hungary and Yugoslavia (Tito)) and 2. poor Soviet economic planning going back to Stalin's policies post WWII. The US had absolutely nothing to do with the fall of Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc, get a grip, get some perspective and for $DEITIES sake man, get a sense of humour.
Also almost all Eastern Europeans learned British English (En_UK), so reflect on that before trying this stunt again.
whoever modded this insightful also needs a grip, perspective and a sense of humour.
Do you know what Fascism is?
You've just described Totalitarianism, which comes in many forms including Communist and Fascist.
The critical difference you've missed is that like all fascist governments, the society in 1984 is a rigidly enforced class based system which is the antithesis of Communism which is an enforced classless system (which doesn't work, which was the point of Animal Farm). Fascism is very much about controlling how people think and feel, so much so that one of O'briens lines in the book is "we will eliminate the orgasm" which is to extend total control over the human body itself.
The society in 1984 has three distinct classes, this alone means it is not Communism. The inner party has all the rights, the outer party has few rights but a few benefits and the proles have none and are kept completely demoralised. It is made clear when Winston talks to O'brien that the entire society works for the betterment and empowerment of the few at the top (the Inner Party members) who's main goal is keep themselves in power. This is typical of Fascist governments, whilst the people fight and eat rations the upper echelons dine well. This is why Mussolini said, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power". Fascism is about the centralisation of power, not the empowerment of all (which is communism, in theory)
It was published in 1948, it was written before then with the ideas Orwell had during the war. The likes of Lord Haw Haw being the model. In 1948 there was still a significant Fascist presence in England (I think this is where most yanks go wrong with 1948, it was written by an Englishman. No offence to Americans of course, I love you like brothers). In Europe the ideas of perpetual war to keep the masses in line and ensure continuing leadership always belonged to the extremist right (fascism is an extremist right philosophy).
Where the direct comparison between 1984 and Fascism begins is in the party structure. In 1984 you had three levels, the Inner party who had rights and decided things for everyone else (this is a direct link to the inner Nazi Party). Then you have the outer party members, those considered pure enough to have responsibilities and benefits but not able to make real deceptions about their life (these are the Aryans and upper class German citizens). Finally you have the Proles, no rights, no responsibilities and kept completely demoralised (the average German). Fascist governments always end up with at least these three basic groups and maintained a very rigid structure. Also the types of propaganda used in 1984 were very much like that produced by Nazi Germany, an external group were always blamed for internal problems like the Jews in Nazi Germany (Goldstein is a Jewish sounding name).
But to be more specific, Fascist totalitarianism which as I said was a big fear in 40's England, especially by liberals (as in liberalism, free thinkers) of the time. Orwell did fit in with this group. Fascism is about enforcement of a rigid classed society, which was the society depicted in 1984. In Europe at the time, fascism was still as much of a threat as communism.
Reaches over and presses the "accept call" button on the desktop only to hear your wife start to complain at you through the laptop speakers and wonders what the hell am I doing in a starbucks, I like real coffee.
1984 was Orwell's diatribe against Fascism (Nazism specifically).
Animal Farm was Orwell's diatribe against Communism, Napoleon played the role of Stalin, Snowball played Leon Trotsky and other purged party members. There was a reason Orwell used Trotsky pigs and mentioned them specifically throughout the book. Dogs were the KGB, Boxer was the unthinking average citizen.
Expansys AU - A$860
Expansys UK - GBP 480 (A$790)
I bought the Milestone instead.
Google's biggest mistake was only selling the N1 in the US where people don't like buying a phone outright. The demand from Europe, Australia and Asia was fairly high compared to the US but we had to wait for 3rd party resellers to get it and then pay a premium (US$520 != A$900 at a 0.9:1 exchange rate). They should have made more deals with carriers, personally I'd prefer the N1 over a Desire as I like the vanilla Android interface over HTC Sense as of right now I can only get the Desire in Australia from a carrier (but then again I bought a Milestone (GSM Droid) outright for A$550).
Google understands the Sunk Cost fallacy, they realise that they don't have the expertise and resources to maintain a retail front for one product and that it would be far easier to let 3rd parties such as existing phone retailers and carriers to sell the product. This store pretty much fell into the "too hard" and "too expensive" basket.
Google clearly did not have the experience nessasary to deal directly with the public (and I'm an Android fan). Google has realised this and rather then trying to haphazardly throw money at it to fix it they've written it off as a bad idea and terminated it. Google can still get the N1 (N2 and N3) out there, but through intermediaries who are set up to deal with the public.
Having owned a HTC Dream and Motorola Milestone as well as having several mates with N1's I'm confident to say that Android is going from strength to strength.
Warning, do not approach.
Apple uses 5400 RPM hard drives. 7200 RPM hard drives are now standard on Dell Vostro's. For the same configuration you will pay at least A$500 less for a Dell with NBD on-site support then you will for a Macbook except the dell will have standardised display ports.