Those that do take advantage of the increased opportunity will remain poor, but we can't punish the rest of society for their lack of motivation and/or laziness.
No, we can't, nor should we. But we still have to live with the consequences of having a lot of poor people around, feeling generally miserable and cheated, even though it might be their own fault.
If you take away the ability for some to get rich, you remove the motivation for all.
Would Bill Gates not have founded Microsoft if he knew that he would only get one billion dollar instead of one trillion or whatever it is that he has now?
In a society where everyone gets 100 $MONETARY_UNIT/month, everyone will be jealous of the one that gets 1000 $MONETARY_UNIT/month, and most people will probably try as hard to get there, as if that position would bring 2000 or even 10000 $MONETARY_UNIT/month.
No one is saying that we should make the rich people poor. Increased taxes will still make the rich people richer than anyone else.
Not only does America have greater income inequality, but it matters more in America. There's no universal health care, social security is dependent upon you paying into it (something many people forget), single parents are expected to work full-time from the time their child is about 2 months old, etc.
The reason it matters more in America is because of the greater income inequality. In Sweden (good example since I live here..:P), the higher taxation and minimum wages, and also a non-linear taxation where people who earn more will not only pay a higher tax but even a bigger share of their income, results in a smaller income inequality. This money goes into public healthcare and social security, in order to basically make sure that even if you're the lowest drug-addict scum on earth, you don't have to steal anything, but can just show up at the social security office and get more than enough money to buy everything they need (except, unfortunately for them, the drugs).
This does not stop all crime, of course, since the drug addicts prefer to buy drugs and alcohol for the money and then live on the streets, and there are always a lot of people that still aren't happy with what they got but rather want to have more. There are also the people that are here illegally, which means that they can't get any help from the government.
Always those pirates destroying for the industry! If there wouldn't have been all these pirates that downloaded all the games and broke the DRM on all the consoles, the industry wouldn't have this loss!
Oh wait.. "Record breaking" you say? Well, without the pirates they would have broken the record even better!
They aren't doing anything illegal, however, external forces like the US and the *AA are trying very hard to change the laws. If this happens, it could be argued that an own nation might possibly be better.
The *slowest* speed available today is 6Mb/s (symetrical) This is bullshit and you know that as well.:P
Maybe in your apartment block it is, or in certain (maybe rather big, but still probably quite limited) parts of Oslo, but not for the majority.
Why do you think they would implement technology that was state-of-the-art 20 years ago?
What the GP meant was that they implemented a lot of generic hardware solutions for computer operations that was very common at the time but was wasteful on the CPU. The PC platform has already implemented chipmem (external graphics memory) and DMA for a lot of things (IDE, network, etc).
Fortunately, Europeans are not yet as dependent on their cars so they actually need to watch TV in it. I can't understand the obsession USA:ians has with turning their car into a living room.
So, for the ignorant Europeans here that don't know how much a senator can affect: What's the chance that this thing will get through and actually become law? And would it be just a local one for a state, or for the whole country? (and by extension, the whole Europe since the US seems to like enforcing its laws on other countries as well).
Yes, but we are talking about spammers that write their messages in images, so it will show up in the email readers, not about viruses. I still haven't seen any mainstream email clients that automatically opens up compressed archives and happily displays/execute whatever is in them.
Personally I use gmail. At the moment it seems to be around 1000 spam messages in the spam folder. To me, the end user, it's just a number on the screen that I can chose to remove from view if even the number bothers me. To google, it probably causes a lot of more problems since they actually have to store the crap.
Actually, their intention so far has been to spread out a "carpet of fear" amongst the average citizens. They don't lose any potential income on the big FTP sites or DC-hubs, since average Joe don't know how to find them, and even in their wildest trip could they ever think that the FTP owner would actually have bought those 400.000 albums. They are more scared about this aforementioned Joe actually downloading the song he wants from [insert pop idol of the month] instead of buying the whole album. This is why they target the "little guy", to show people that it's not only the big downloaders that are getting caught.
Slashdot Mirror
No, we can't, nor should we. But we still have to live with the consequences of having a lot of poor people around, feeling generally miserable and cheated, even though it might be their own fault.
If you take away the ability for some to get rich, you remove the motivation for all.Would Bill Gates not have founded Microsoft if he knew that he would only get one billion dollar instead of one trillion or whatever it is that he has now?
In a society where everyone gets 100 $MONETARY_UNIT/month, everyone will be jealous of the one that gets 1000 $MONETARY_UNIT/month, and most people will probably try as hard to get there, as if that position would bring 2000 or even 10000 $MONETARY_UNIT/month.
No one is saying that we should make the rich people poor. Increased taxes will still make the rich people richer than anyone else.
The reason it matters more in America is because of the greater income inequality. In Sweden (good example since I live here.. :P), the higher taxation and minimum wages, and also a non-linear taxation where people who earn more will not only pay a higher tax but even a bigger share of their income, results in a smaller income inequality. This money goes into public healthcare and social security, in order to basically make sure that even if you're the lowest drug-addict scum on earth, you don't have to steal anything, but can just show up at the social security office and get more than enough money to buy everything they need (except, unfortunately for them, the drugs).
This does not stop all crime, of course, since the drug addicts prefer to buy drugs and alcohol for the money and then live on the streets, and there are always a lot of people that still aren't happy with what they got but rather want to have more. There are also the people that are here illegally, which means that they can't get any help from the government.
It does, however, help a great deal.
Always those pirates destroying for the industry! If there wouldn't have been all these pirates that downloaded all the games and broke the DRM on all the consoles, the industry wouldn't have this loss!
Oh wait.. "Record breaking" you say? Well, without the pirates they would have broken the record even better!
They aren't doing anything illegal, however, external forces like the US and the *AA are trying very hard to change the laws. If this happens, it could be argued that an own nation might possibly be better.
In Sweden it's illegal for a journalist to reveal his/her sources, unless the source permits it.
Clarification 2: Timing the decay of the stored charge in capacitor is an A/D-converter.
Please refrain from using fictional countries in your examples.
No, 0xBAD7A57E
HTH.
Unlike now when all the companies gladly announce their failures in order to help competing companies?
They would still have to pay the royalty, if they include a DVD-player there.
I have really no idea how much HP pays for an OEM license for windows, but it's hardly $400. :P
A better guess could be somewhere around $50?
Why do you think they would implement technology that was state-of-the-art 20 years ago?
What the GP meant was that they implemented a lot of generic hardware solutions for computer operations that was very common at the time but was wasteful on the CPU. The PC platform has already implemented chipmem (external graphics memory) and DMA for a lot of things (IDE, network, etc).
Hell yeah! I hate those lame 3D games anyway. *goes back to his amiga*
Personally I loved Zelda II, but most people didn't.[citation needed]
Seriously, I think Zelda II is one of the better Zeldas, and I'm sure we're not alone!
Heck, I remember when 3D meant isometric.
What's next? Letting blind people own sharks?
So, for the ignorant Europeans here that don't know how much a senator can affect: What's the chance that this thing will get through and actually become law? And would it be just a local one for a state, or for the whole country? (and by extension, the whole Europe since the US seems to like enforcing its laws on other countries as well).
Or power switches??
As it does in 99.99% of all audio amplifiers. Hopefully you will never get in contact with the other 0.01%.
Yes, but we are talking about spammers that write their messages in images, so it will show up in the email readers, not about viruses. I still haven't seen any mainstream email clients that automatically opens up compressed archives and happily displays/execute whatever is in them.
Personally I use gmail. At the moment it seems to be around 1000 spam messages in the spam folder. To me, the end user, it's just a number on the screen that I can chose to remove from view if even the number bothers me. To google, it probably causes a lot of more problems since they actually have to store the crap.
Or you could just zip/rar/tar/lha your files and attach to the email.
Actually, their intention so far has been to spread out a "carpet of fear" amongst the average citizens. They don't lose any potential income on the big FTP sites or DC-hubs, since average Joe don't know how to find them, and even in their wildest trip could they ever think that the FTP owner would actually have bought those 400.000 albums. They are more scared about this aforementioned Joe actually downloading the song he wants from [insert pop idol of the month] instead of buying the whole album. This is why they target the "little guy", to show people that it's not only the big downloaders that are getting caught.