ENTIRE modern financial structure depends on trust. That's that. Void papers and monies backed by various privately owned central banks or private investment firms had been the perpetrator of this trust system so far. And all the world obliged by it.
If you really go down to it, there is nothing real left backing the financial and monetary values and papers right now. They are SO inflated and complicated that, one top hedge fund manager said on cnn, even he himself doesnt know the exact composition of the fund he was managing. However this fund too, is taken as a real fiscal value, and is also considered as a backer of monetary value of the country it is being traded in.
water vapor. if you erase that water vapor and overinflated stocks, you will see that nothing remains backing the money of most countries like switzerland, britain, usa.
whereas this BRIC alliance that the summary so gleefully drops down, actually PRODUCES value. they have solid backing for their money. contrary to the others, you can actually buy solid products and services with that money from those countries.
Once there is traction behind these, and the water vapor of the established financial scourge in the west is ignored, everything easily will change.
really. china produces most of the world's products now. so, what ? some investment bank from wall street, is going to threaten china ? oh boy. what will happen if china says 'give me yuan' ?
Why dont we bring horse carriage jobs by banning cars. or, by mandating 1 horse carriage be sold per car, or, 1 horse carriage worth of extra charges on cars, to be paid to horse carriage industry ?
whereas the company who actually sold those oses is producing this browser and NOT supporting its OWN product, something else, produced by the very 'the people' they are fighting against supports the very customers they have gave up on. firefox.
he could live and work in,say, sweden, where the government and bureaucracy, law and justice are generally not whores to private corporations like this judge is, and spend a lifetime in honest and secure-ass (thanks, social security) work, and die happily, and not at once set foot in sweden.
They should just buy those industries, and get the world rid of a plague. These industries' interest pushing is preventing all kinds of technological innovations and breakthroughs. A LOT of them affect major internet companies like google.
let me see the place where in ANY ethical or moral document that sets the precedents for our current societal civilization, any distinction about anything 'private' or 'public', or otherwise.
ETHICS IS ETHICS. no group or person is allowed to shatter its barriers, regardless of the constitution of their group.
yes, they should have told rim investors of the world to go fuck off. investors encouraging or coercing engaging in unethical acts DOES NOT JUSTIFY that act.
period.
anyone who is condoning or justifying or encouraging that act, are responsible, and should be prosecuted.
why the fuck do shareholders have a right to expect profits for immoral behavior anyway ? why ? because capitalism encourages it ? then the SYSTEM is wrong. period.
you think this single question asked by click, a i.t./internet show is hard ? wait until you see some dastardly figure get fried in hard talk - and its not frying as in the 'frying' of silly american shows -> they ask SO shattering questions that you may see politicians blabbering, speechless, and trying to talk by babbling in absolute silence, aghast at the weight of the question.
this is the blonde man that does the majority of hard talk though. there is a woman who occasionally hosts it, but she is apparently not witty enough as the blonde host, and instead tries to bog down her guests by talking too much, and being a prick by not letting them answer.
the blonde guy would ask something like "why did you compromise morals and ethics of the country you are based in, in order to do business in another", and the rim ceo would start babbling in this case, and when gets "but isnt it hypocrisy?" answer to his babbling, he would be dumbstruck.
few dare to sit on that chair. those who do sit, go through the hoop of fire and come out clean, get big p.r. points.
oh sure i do pass the ethical correspondence barrier. especially in occasions like this, when some idiot comes up and says that whatever you do abroad, its all ok, as long as its 'business'.
so its all ok if you do slave trading in saudi arabia, (still persists in some parts), or, sell underage girls to tribal elders in afghanistan, but, then come and be against slavery and pedophilia in your own country.
no its not ok.its not something that is unethical or illegal - it is outright bastardry. as simple as that. your justification does not matter AT ALL. if your employees would be held hostage by a backwater country so that you would commit in unethical dealings, then YOU SHOULDNT HAVE GONE TO THAT COUNTRY TO DO BUSINESS. its as simple as that. and, i wasnt among those who defended hotz in that incident.
and excuse me for failing to see those who defend such shit as morons, idiots or whoresons. and my attitude ? why yes, it IS holier-than-thou, because, it IS actually holier than thou who defend immoral and unethical acts behind the guise of business.
my posts over 2 ? apparently you havent seen the earlier pages. you may not be like that, however there are a lot of people who feel that calling bullshit as it is whenever one sees it, is something worthy. the world is in this problematic state, because people are not doing precisely that.
a corporation operating from, and enjoying the benefits of, and obeying the morals, ethics, rules and laws of a democratic country, cant go just ignoring any of them in a foreign country, just to make profit.
its as simple as that. you cant do slave trade in africa, but, be against slavery in america.
if not, then that corporation has to be sent over to the country for which it is violating the rules/laws/ethics of its own country. period.
When the king holds your entire business for ransom, with the requirement that you do for them what you do for every other government out there, you do it. Whining and complaining about RIM's "security problems" is just childish.
what the fuck does the above even BEGIN to mean ?
so, if a king holds your business ransom, you can do ANYthing, and its ok, and those who question unethical doings, are 'childish' ?
'whine' word usage is attention-catching there. so, now when someone complains about unethical dealings of a 'business', it becomes a whine ?
what kind of fucked up reasoning is that ?
really. are you a fucking moron, or a troll ?
no, no, dont excuse the rough language. since you shattered the barrier to ethics on grounds of 'business needs', i had had taken the liberty of shattering the barrier to ethics of civil correspondence, on a random ground of my choosing.
cost-reduction is a downward spiral. while everyone tries to maximize profits, they minimize costs. this means lower wages. this means lower spending. the need to economize.
hypothetically capitalism would provide dissemination of the profits gained to public through shareholdership. but, inevitably, the ownership of the means concentrate on less and less hands, due to nature of profit mechanism - those who profit more through having more ownership in means of production, increasingly gain the power to obtain more percentage ownership of the means of production. this leads to consolidation. it reflects on all fields of life, from running of corporations (internet consolidating in the hands of a few big guys anyone ?) to income distribution and resulting spending
as you can see, 1% of america owns 53% of income and wealth, approximately. top 5% including that 1%, owns a whopping 72%.
bottom 85% people, who would be the target of all these innovations and speed as consumers, get only 15%.
naturally as you can see, suddenly speed becomes something that is very low on their agenda. they need to economize. you wouldnt want to fly at supersonic sounds by paying a few grants, while getting only 15% of the pie.
inevitable result of ownership and capitalism mechanics. the more, increasingly gets more and becomes an ever-shrinking group of people, while the masses get less and less and the numbers that get less grows.
what the fuck is that ? i have a goodly amount of people in my facebook list, yet i havent seen a single one of them buy something from facebook, its 3rd party interests or each other.
i guess a suit is inventing a new buzzword to shake the fools' money in wall street.
does it ? i coded in perl 10 years ago. since then, i didnt care for it. i moved on to php. it just means that less people are using and willing to contribute to perl, regardless of its usage in scripting for server-side tasks in linux.
just because you or some others see it as important, does not mean others will too.
Big corporation buys innovative, useful device, fucks it up. Something that could develop into something great, gets bogged down in development in corporate machine.
capitalism doesnt solve any issues of organization size. it just rationalizes them.
Slashdot Mirror
ENTIRE modern financial structure depends on trust. That's that. Void papers and monies backed by various privately owned central banks or private investment firms had been the perpetrator of this trust system so far. And all the world obliged by it.
If you really go down to it, there is nothing real left backing the financial and monetary values and papers right now. They are SO inflated and complicated that, one top hedge fund manager said on cnn, even he himself doesnt know the exact composition of the fund he was managing. However this fund too, is taken as a real fiscal value, and is also considered as a backer of monetary value of the country it is being traded in.
water vapor. if you erase that water vapor and overinflated stocks, you will see that nothing remains backing the money of most countries like switzerland, britain, usa.
whereas this BRIC alliance that the summary so gleefully drops down, actually PRODUCES value. they have solid backing for their money. contrary to the others, you can actually buy solid products and services with that money from those countries.
Once there is traction behind these, and the water vapor of the established financial scourge in the west is ignored, everything easily will change.
really. china produces most of the world's products now. so, what ? some investment bank from wall street, is going to threaten china ? oh boy. what will happen if china says 'give me yuan' ?
Why dont we bring horse carriage jobs by banning cars. or, by mandating 1 horse carriage be sold per car, or, 1 horse carriage worth of extra charges on cars, to be paid to horse carriage industry ?
whereas the company who actually sold those oses is producing this browser and NOT supporting its OWN product, something else, produced by the very 'the people' they are fighting against supports the very customers they have gave up on. firefox.
he could live and work in ,say, sweden, where the government and bureaucracy, law and justice are generally not whores to private corporations like this judge is, and spend a lifetime in honest and secure-ass (thanks, social security) work, and die happily, and not at once set foot in sweden.
hmmmmmm. sounds like a plan.
you need to take existing talent off of them. and setting up a new label and doing that will take longer.
They should just buy those industries, and get the world rid of a plague. These industries' interest pushing is preventing all kinds of technological innovations and breakthroughs. A LOT of them affect major internet companies like google.
beat that.
Its too late. you should have thought it before going 'oracle' on your community. now there's libre office.
ha.
let me see the place where in ANY ethical or moral document that sets the precedents for our current societal civilization, any distinction about anything 'private' or 'public', or otherwise.
ETHICS IS ETHICS. no group or person is allowed to shatter its barriers, regardless of the constitution of their group.
yes, they should have told rim investors of the world to go fuck off. investors encouraging or coercing engaging in unethical acts DOES NOT JUSTIFY that act.
period.
anyone who is condoning or justifying or encouraging that act, are responsible, and should be prosecuted.
why the fuck do shareholders have a right to expect profits for immoral behavior anyway ? why ? because capitalism encourages it ? then the SYSTEM is wrong. period.
so, if people shatter ethical barriers IN GROUP, 'as a company', its ok.
or, if 'shareholders' start complaining, you are allowed to shatter barriers to ethics.
is that it ?
bbc has a habit of asking hellish questions.
you think this single question asked by click, a i.t./internet show is hard ? wait until you see some dastardly figure get fried in hard talk - and its not frying as in the 'frying' of silly american shows -> they ask SO shattering questions that you may see politicians blabbering, speechless, and trying to talk by babbling in absolute silence, aghast at the weight of the question.
this is the blonde man that does the majority of hard talk though. there is a woman who occasionally hosts it, but she is apparently not witty enough as the blonde host, and instead tries to bog down her guests by talking too much, and being a prick by not letting them answer.
the blonde guy would ask something like "why did you compromise morals and ethics of the country you are based in, in order to do business in another", and the rim ceo would start babbling in this case, and when gets "but isnt it hypocrisy?" answer to his babbling, he would be dumbstruck.
few dare to sit on that chair. those who do sit, go through the hoop of fire and come out clean, get big p.r. points.
oh sure i do pass the ethical correspondence barrier. especially in occasions like this, when some idiot comes up and says that whatever you do abroad, its all ok, as long as its 'business'.
so its all ok if you do slave trading in saudi arabia, (still persists in some parts), or, sell underage girls to tribal elders in afghanistan, but, then come and be against slavery and pedophilia in your own country.
no its not ok.its not something that is unethical or illegal - it is outright bastardry. as simple as that. your justification does not matter AT ALL. if your employees would be held hostage by a backwater country so that you would commit in unethical dealings, then YOU SHOULDNT HAVE GONE TO THAT COUNTRY TO DO BUSINESS. its as simple as that. and, i wasnt among those who defended hotz in that incident.
and excuse me for failing to see those who defend such shit as morons, idiots or whoresons. and my attitude ? why yes, it IS holier-than-thou, because, it IS actually holier than thou who defend immoral and unethical acts behind the guise of business.
my posts over 2 ? apparently you havent seen the earlier pages. you may not be like that, however there are a lot of people who feel that calling bullshit as it is whenever one sees it, is something worthy. the world is in this problematic state, because people are not doing precisely that.
STILL wrong.
a corporation operating from, and enjoying the benefits of, and obeying the morals, ethics, rules and laws of a democratic country, cant go just ignoring any of them in a foreign country, just to make profit.
its as simple as that. you cant do slave trade in africa, but, be against slavery in america.
if not, then that corporation has to be sent over to the country for which it is violating the rules/laws/ethics of its own country. period.
When the king holds your entire business for ransom, with the requirement that you do for them what you do for every other government out there, you do it. Whining and complaining about RIM's "security problems" is just childish.
what the fuck does the above even BEGIN to mean ?
so, if a king holds your business ransom, you can do ANYthing, and its ok, and those who question unethical doings, are 'childish' ?
'whine' word usage is attention-catching there. so, now when someone complains about unethical dealings of a 'business', it becomes a whine ?
what kind of fucked up reasoning is that ?
really. are you a fucking moron, or a troll ?
no, no, dont excuse the rough language. since you shattered the barrier to ethics on grounds of 'business needs', i had had taken the liberty of shattering the barrier to ethics of civil correspondence, on a random ground of my choosing.
Since they are still doing business, they are happy.
cost-reduction is a downward spiral. while everyone tries to maximize profits, they minimize costs. this means lower wages. this means lower spending. the need to economize.
hypothetically capitalism would provide dissemination of the profits gained to public through shareholdership. but, inevitably, the ownership of the means concentrate on less and less hands, due to nature of profit mechanism - those who profit more through having more ownership in means of production, increasingly gain the power to obtain more percentage ownership of the means of production. this leads to consolidation. it reflects on all fields of life, from running of corporations (internet consolidating in the hands of a few big guys anyone ?) to income distribution and resulting spending
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
as you can see, 1% of america owns 53% of income and wealth, approximately. top 5% including that 1%, owns a whopping 72%.
bottom 85% people, who would be the target of all these innovations and speed as consumers, get only 15%.
naturally as you can see, suddenly speed becomes something that is very low on their agenda. they need to economize. you wouldnt want to fly at supersonic sounds by paying a few grants, while getting only 15% of the pie.
inevitable result of ownership and capitalism mechanics. the more, increasingly gets more and becomes an ever-shrinking group of people, while the masses get less and less and the numbers that get less grows.
They would fix the sheer, despicable incompetence those failure of a companies had had brought upon you.
precisely.
well what you describe plagues EVERY kind of effort on this planet actually. whether open source or private. doesnt matter.
national emergency as in the country with the strongest military on earth threatens you supposedly despite being an ally.
it wasnt rejected because it was unenforceable. french govt. accepted it, nz govt. accepted it, see, thats not a reason for rejection.
Remember how it was leaked that u.s. govt. bullied spain govt. to passing such a bill, and how it unanimously got rejected when bullying was leaked.
apparently, u.s. govt has not stopped being the whore of hollywood and record companies after that, and is working like a faithful dog since then.
what the fuck is that ? i have a goodly amount of people in my facebook list, yet i havent seen a single one of them buy something from facebook, its 3rd party interests or each other.
i guess a suit is inventing a new buzzword to shake the fools' money in wall street.
does it ? i coded in perl 10 years ago. since then, i didnt care for it. i moved on to php. it just means that less people are using and willing to contribute to perl, regardless of its usage in scripting for server-side tasks in linux.
just because you or some others see it as important, does not mean others will too.
Big corporation buys innovative, useful device, fucks it up. Something that could develop into something great, gets bogged down in development in corporate machine.
capitalism doesnt solve any issues of organization size. it just rationalizes them.