big companies will patent any innovation. imagine what would have happened if the rts concept was patented by a company and monopolized for the last decade.
youre thinking shallow. as i said, if there is any innovation, they will immediately patent them, and monopolize them. imagine what would happen if rts concept was patented by a company and that company was the sole producer of rts games for the last decade. or, they just didnt want to produce rts games in some period.
big corporations = bad, with current patent and copyright system.
vegetables are what is used to actually give taste to REAL dishes, even for dishes made with meat. because, meat, always tastes like, well, meat. you have to have vegetables to make something different out of it.
think : its no different than eating potatoes all the time. same and same. but, we are conditioned by the society to think that we are actually eating well, because, well, we are eating meat. this is reminiscent of the earlier centuries in which meat was hard to find, and therefore considered a richness in the table. its not like that anymore.
steam is easier to find than any retailer. places like gamersgate com, steam, direct to drive will be gaining ground on and on, and boxed sales will be things of the past. they should start up their online service, if they want to stay in business.
difference ? company will still be avoiding trying anything risky. and, if they actually invent anything, they will attempt to patent it, and killing innovation on it.
back in bush era, even shitty private 'think thank' companies werent able to talk about any wrongdoing as such. thats my point. to be honest, actually, the name of this company suggests they are probably right wing oriented. hence, no surprise.
When one party holds more then 51% of the senate, any candidate can be approved. There only needs to be a 51% majority to confirm nominations. If you are the president and your party controls more then 50% of the senate, then you can get anyone confirmed as long as the party supports your nomination. No watering down needed.
no. with the numbers and conditions for balance u.s. senate has, just flipping 1-2 senators to the other side will change things. as frequently happens. given even the side switches of some senators in the recent years, it is evident that any party can sway a senator to their side even if he doesnt totally switch sides.
So what your saying is that the republicans did what the democrats wouldn't. Actually, no that's not what your saying. What you are saying is that you are confused.
is it ? or, did republicans try to weer off the blame in the last moment before the elections so the mud wouldnt stick, after years of doing business with them.
Halliburton is still in contract with the US government and had been long before Bush was a president. If there was something wrong, Clinton could have changed that and Obama certainly could have too.
yes they are, and they will be contracting a long time too. when an army is locked into equipment, software it is locked into it for a long time. decades.
Actually, Halliburton picked up one of the three logistics contracts that the old contract was broken into. This wasn't as intricate as you are suggesting as Halliburton was providing services that wasn't directly ties into military operations. these services was transportation (not lock in), food and shelter (again, no locking outside caloric requirements).
you apparently havent grasped the concept yet. let me put it in a context; when ussr went poof, turkey wanted to buy soviet equipment to supplement the army, because there were very good purpose specific equipment there. but, after research, it was found that the equipment would be too incompatible with the existing nato standards that, there would be an entire separate chain of supplies, spare parts, qualified personnel would have to be created in order to maintain them. so, the project was canceled.
such is the way with military. you can contract out any kind of lame task like logistics, catering to any given party. but, the more locked in contracts require the same standards. that goes for similar technology bloc too - if you buy eurofighter, you are locked into it for at least two decades.
haliburton didnt sell any aircraft to u.s. but heaven knows what kind of equipment was sold and deals made in secret. due to terms of these, and to get favorable conditions for renewal, it is possible that the administrations to come may have to give them bones here and now, like the smaller bit of logistic contract youre talking about.
youre way too naive and shallow in your thinking of social/political matters. things are not as simple as you make them up to be.
what this guy asks, was the thing which turned gaming from an innovative field into a mass manufactory of profits for shareholders' sake, and ushered in the "SequelToGreatGame XVIII" era. and the rehash concepts.
if money is put to indie teams, those indie teams will get turned into just other manufactories for profit. and when they dont profit enough they will be shut down as divisions.
Evidently you don't even know what you speaking of yourself. First, it's the administration's right to stack the appointments under him. It's true that they need approval from congress but that's it. The president selects them, submits them, and directs their actions. IF at any time, they didn't want to use Halliburton, they could have stopped. If at any time, they wanted to make it legally required to have a separation between government employees and businesses like Halliburton, they could have by executive policy order as well as asked congress to pass a law. They didn't.
thats it ?
if you bring someone that the other party is totally against, you cannot have it passed. hence, everyone has to pick a candidate that is acceptable by the other party under the guise of 'bipartisanship'. otherwise your candidate gets rejected, and you get into a standoff. that was the way the candidates were selected even by obama, supposedly a very leftist president. candidates are vetted even before they are selected as a lot, through unofficial channels in between the sides. this is the way things work in every country. not only such a situation is detrimental for the administration, but also bad for the image of the country internationally. it never happens, because the ones who appoint never chooses someone who wouldnt get accepted. so its either the approver's candidate, or closest to what they can get.
in addition stopping a military contract is not a trifle. because of the immense lock-in that occurs due to the military equipment, armies use the same vendor for decades until they can slowly replace their vendor with newly acquired equipment. however as you can see, democrats at least canceled the biggest contract they can cancel.
also, by saying 'you showed nothing', you wont end up invalidating the opposing argument. its self-reinforcement at best.
im not an american, i dont need to read the fucking constitution. however, ironically, i seem to know more than you that appointments need to be approved, and all the important places in bureaucracy therefore pass from approval by either house, even if appointment is done by administration. and, how each coming administration tries to stuff the bureaucracy with their own men, and how they staff the lower ranks with more of their men. and then how easy it is when you have congress and senate at your hand. you either get the candidate you like, or, they have to bring you a candidate you can minimally accept. under the guise of requiring 'bipartisanship'. and how, after a certain period of time, through that, the bureaucracy shapes policies according to the appointed lot, and even when administration changes, they shape it to their own policy. even to extreme extents like cia or military ignoring obama's orders to stop firing missiles at the first 2 months of his administration. it is a goner that any staffed bureaucrat does their best to cater to the bidding of their leash holders.
this is the way english and american bureaucracies have worked since centuries. in britain it is so solid that for centuries most of their policies remained same.
yeah all those senate committees, congress groups do not affect anything. its just administration. like, army awarding the haliburton contracts. obama appoints all staff.
apparently you didnt read the news that came up a few days ago. since a long while facebook has been importing gmail contacts of people, and google has been letting it. when google wanted to do the same, facebook refused. then when google took off that api that facebook used for importing contacts, facebook found another roundabout way to do it. now they are taking the gmail username/passwords from their users, and logging into their gmail accounts to import contacts. and google started complaining to users about it. the morons that are posing as users who are idiot enough to give a service a critical user/pass that allows access to all other services a major provider offers.
thats the situation. so, the fuckers here are the facebook.
or, in other words, you cannot realize that there is heaps of difference in between random people saying something around the net, or notable organizations doing it.
'plenty of people' here being random citizens around the internet. not any notable organization. leave aside an organization that is entitled national policy center for anything.
yeah zuckerberg. suck it up. you rode on the web culture getting to where you are. you cannot just go protectionist on us and become a control freak. share data, as others share data with you.
forget the millions of websites millions of individuals, ordinary people opened up, to sell those google ads, which then turned into small businesses on their own. not to mention them starting using i.t. services like hosting and whatnot from the start, and stimulating the growth of those sectors. not to mention the web devs, sysadmins hired by bazillions of hosting or software development companies which popped up to meet the demand. or, who started working outright on their own.
now, ALL that revenue will gather in google's hands !! yay, great !! lets see what will happen to internet sector after that consolidation.
morons like you who are using and working on the technologies the damn dirty hippies (no joke, really) invented and spread out around the world ?
it is ironic for someone to talk about this, that, spam, internet and whatnot without knowing shit about it. read some i.t. history first and then blabber about.
Slashdot Mirror
big companies will patent any innovation. imagine what would have happened if the rts concept was patented by a company and monopolized for the last decade.
youre thinking shallow. as i said, if there is any innovation, they will immediately patent them, and monopolize them. imagine what would happen if rts concept was patented by a company and that company was the sole producer of rts games for the last decade. or, they just didnt want to produce rts games in some period.
big corporations = bad, with current patent and copyright system.
vegetables are what is used to actually give taste to REAL dishes, even for dishes made with meat. because, meat, always tastes like, well, meat. you have to have vegetables to make something different out of it.
think : its no different than eating potatoes all the time. same and same. but, we are conditioned by the society to think that we are actually eating well, because, well, we are eating meat. this is reminiscent of the earlier centuries in which meat was hard to find, and therefore considered a richness in the table. its not like that anymore.
they dont force onto you a restricting client, you never have any issues with modding the games or patches, and most of the games are drm free even.
steam is easier to find than any retailer. places like gamersgate com, steam, direct to drive will be gaining ground on and on, and boxed sales will be things of the past. they should start up their online service, if they want to stay in business.
difference ? company will still be avoiding trying anything risky. and, if they actually invent anything, they will attempt to patent it, and killing innovation on it.
doesnt matter.
back in bush era, even shitty private 'think thank' companies werent able to talk about any wrongdoing as such. thats my point. to be honest, actually, the name of this company suggests they are probably right wing oriented. hence, no surprise.
When one party holds more then 51% of the senate, any candidate can be approved. There only needs to be a 51% majority to confirm nominations. If you are the president and your party controls more then 50% of the senate, then you can get anyone confirmed as long as the party supports your nomination. No watering down needed.
no. with the numbers and conditions for balance u.s. senate has, just flipping 1-2 senators to the other side will change things. as frequently happens. given even the side switches of some senators in the recent years, it is evident that any party can sway a senator to their side even if he doesnt totally switch sides.
So what your saying is that the republicans did what the democrats wouldn't. Actually, no that's not what your saying. What you are saying is that you are confused.
is it ? or, did republicans try to weer off the blame in the last moment before the elections so the mud wouldnt stick, after years of doing business with them.
Halliburton is still in contract with the US government and had been long before Bush was a president. If there was something wrong, Clinton could have changed that and Obama certainly could have too.
yes they are, and they will be contracting a long time too. when an army is locked into equipment, software it is locked into it for a long time. decades.
Actually, Halliburton picked up one of the three logistics contracts that the old contract was broken into. This wasn't as intricate as you are suggesting as Halliburton was providing services that wasn't directly ties into military operations. these services was transportation (not lock in), food and shelter (again, no locking outside caloric requirements).
you apparently havent grasped the concept yet. let me put it in a context; when ussr went poof, turkey wanted to buy soviet equipment to supplement the army, because there were very good purpose specific equipment there. but, after research, it was found that the equipment would be too incompatible with the existing nato standards that, there would be an entire separate chain of supplies, spare parts, qualified personnel would have to be created in order to maintain them. so, the project was canceled.
such is the way with military. you can contract out any kind of lame task like logistics, catering to any given party. but, the more locked in contracts require the same standards. that goes for similar technology bloc too - if you buy eurofighter, you are locked into it for at least two decades.
haliburton didnt sell any aircraft to u.s. but heaven knows what kind of equipment was sold and deals made in secret. due to terms of these, and to get favorable conditions for renewal, it is possible that the administrations to come may have to give them bones here and now, like the smaller bit of logistic contract youre talking about.
youre way too naive and shallow in your thinking of social/political matters. things are not as simple as you make them up to be.
what this guy asks, was the thing which turned gaming from an innovative field into a mass manufactory of profits for shareholders' sake, and ushered in the "SequelToGreatGame XVIII" era. and the rehash concepts.
if money is put to indie teams, those indie teams will get turned into just other manufactories for profit. and when they dont profit enough they will be shut down as divisions.
Evidently you don't even know what you speaking of yourself. First, it's the administration's right to stack the appointments under him. It's true that they need approval from congress but that's it. The president selects them, submits them, and directs their actions. IF at any time, they didn't want to use Halliburton, they could have stopped. If at any time, they wanted to make it legally required to have a separation between government employees and businesses like Halliburton, they could have by executive policy order as well as asked congress to pass a law. They didn't.
thats it ?
if you bring someone that the other party is totally against, you cannot have it passed. hence, everyone has to pick a candidate that is acceptable by the other party under the guise of 'bipartisanship'. otherwise your candidate gets rejected, and you get into a standoff. that was the way the candidates were selected even by obama, supposedly a very leftist president. candidates are vetted even before they are selected as a lot, through unofficial channels in between the sides. this is the way things work in every country. not only such a situation is detrimental for the administration, but also bad for the image of the country internationally. it never happens, because the ones who appoint never chooses someone who wouldnt get accepted. so its either the approver's candidate, or closest to what they can get.
huh ? democrats won senate at 9 Nov 2006, and biggest halliburton contract was canceled in 31 jul 2006 http://www.alternet.org/story/39567/
in addition stopping a military contract is not a trifle. because of the immense lock-in that occurs due to the military equipment, armies use the same vendor for decades until they can slowly replace their vendor with newly acquired equipment. however as you can see, democrats at least canceled the biggest contract they can cancel.
also, by saying 'you showed nothing', you wont end up invalidating the opposing argument. its self-reinforcement at best.
im not an american, i dont need to read the fucking constitution. however, ironically, i seem to know more than you that appointments need to be approved, and all the important places in bureaucracy therefore pass from approval by either house, even if appointment is done by administration. and, how each coming administration tries to stuff the bureaucracy with their own men, and how they staff the lower ranks with more of their men. and then how easy it is when you have congress and senate at your hand. you either get the candidate you like, or, they have to bring you a candidate you can minimally accept. under the guise of requiring 'bipartisanship'. and how, after a certain period of time, through that, the bureaucracy shapes policies according to the appointed lot, and even when administration changes, they shape it to their own policy. even to extreme extents like cia or military ignoring obama's orders to stop firing missiles at the first 2 months of his administration. it is a goner that any staffed bureaucrat does their best to cater to the bidding of their leash holders.
this is the way english and american bureaucracies have worked since centuries. in britain it is so solid that for centuries most of their policies remained same.
get a fucking clue.
in ways which we yet cannot fathom, by disturbing the natural rhythm that trees developed in billions of years of evolution for day/night cycles...
yeah all those senate committees, congress groups do not affect anything. its just administration. like, army awarding the haliburton contracts. obama appoints all staff.
apparently you didnt read the news that came up a few days ago. since a long while facebook has been importing gmail contacts of people, and google has been letting it. when google wanted to do the same, facebook refused. then when google took off that api that facebook used for importing contacts, facebook found another roundabout way to do it. now they are taking the gmail username/passwords from their users, and logging into their gmail accounts to import contacts. and google started complaining to users about it. the morons that are posing as users who are idiot enough to give a service a critical user/pass that allows access to all other services a major provider offers.
thats the situation. so, the fuckers here are the facebook.
or, in other words, you cannot realize that there is heaps of difference in between random people saying something around the net, or notable organizations doing it.
get a fucking clue.
During the 8 years of Clinton/Cigar dudes rule who do you think held all those no bid contracts, yes Haliburton.
during the 8 yeras of clinton/cigar dudes, congress and senate was at the hands of republicans. the right.
someone please slap the tag.
but require him to register as and use the name 'Douglas Quaid'
im asking about notable organizations, corporations, think thanks, 'science' groups. not ordinary citizens.
'plenty of people' here being random citizens around the internet. not any notable organization. leave aside an organization that is entitled national policy center for anything.
for parent. i posted in this discussion.
where the fuck these people were during bush era, and why didnt they call any inquiry to bush administrations BLATANT dealings with haliburton ?
yeah zuckerberg. suck it up. you rode on the web culture getting to where you are. you cannot just go protectionist on us and become a control freak. share data, as others share data with you.
forget the millions of websites millions of individuals, ordinary people opened up, to sell those google ads, which then turned into small businesses on their own. not to mention them starting using i.t. services like hosting and whatnot from the start, and stimulating the growth of those sectors. not to mention the web devs, sysadmins hired by bazillions of hosting or software development companies which popped up to meet the demand. or, who started working outright on their own.
now, ALL that revenue will gather in google's hands !! yay, great !! lets see what will happen to internet sector after that consolidation.
morons like you who are using and working on the technologies the damn dirty hippies (no joke, really) invented and spread out around the world ?
it is ironic for someone to talk about this, that, spam, internet and whatnot without knowing shit about it. read some i.t. history first and then blabber about.