Which is funny because a large part of the cost (of any product) is the shipping, even though a wine shipped halfway across the world might not taste better than a wine shipped across your own state. Or made in your backyard.
You can't really blame Americans for the economic crisis, just because everybody made bad leveraged investments in their homes and now they don't want to buy all your factory-made gimmicks, reducing worldwide demand. I guess you should have grown food and relied on local demand for expansion instead.
Of course, maybe foreign direct investment wrecked your economy by building all of the gimmicky factories instead of farms like you needed. But you should have regulated your industry to make sure your people won't starve (assuming you're bitching at America from an LDC instead of somewhere posh like France).
Wait, except that the IMF tends to withdraw relief grants from countries that regulate their marketplace and limit foreign direct investment... and that the CIA tends to assassinate any powerful anti-american political figures in countries who resist the expansion. So maybe you can blame us for the economic crisis.
Oh well... at least we win, sort of! America, fuck yeah!
Sounds like somebody just got laid off. To me the "rational thing" is to minimize transaction costs between buyers and sellers in the marketplace in terms of both money and time. Newspaper classifieds cost more money and take longer to print. For example, someone I know recently sold a trailer on craigslist. They got a response within 2 days of posting the ad and sold it to the same responder within a week for their asking price. Posting the ad was free. Running a classified ad would have cost money and possibly taken weeks to reach potential sellers.
This has nothign to do with a megalomaniac need to control. It's just good business sense. The internet is way better for classified ads than your little cart-and-buggy newspaper industry. So get off of your luddite soapbox.
Journalists still have value to society; mostly because they're willing to do investigative journalism to root out the corruption in industry and government, and war journalism where they risk their lives to document events that most people wouldn't see otherwise. But running a monopolistic print classified ad business that burdens buyers and sellers with high transaction costs isn't valuable to society, and it doesn't take a first-rate journalist, just a printing press and some book keepers, and maybe some hired goons to beat up people who dare to try this newfangled "internet" business instead of paying the traditional tolls and fees to wealthy capitalists who happen to own printing presses.
What do gambling sites have to do with the suicide of a 12-year-old?
Also, I find it funny that the response to a boy committing suicide when he was banned from playing games is to ban the entire country from playing games.
Craigslist charges listing fees for real estate ads and job offer ads in major metropolitan centers. I'm pretty sure they are raking in a huge amount of cash.
Whoever modded this offtopic is a total drag. I suggested a viable solution to the problem that the GP brought up as a parallel to the RIAA problem. The drug war is one of our biggest economic wastes... kind of like the music industry!
Ah wait, I'm an idiot, arrythmias are caused by hypokalemia. For some reason I thought I had read that in the summary instead of your quotation. So I suppose your point stands, nobody died from this. It seems like they could though, an irregular heartbeat is a serious condition.
Hypokalemia and cardiac arrhythmias are two different conditions. One is not caused by the other. Just because nobody died from hypokalemia doesn't mean nobody died from cardiac arrhthmias. I don't know if anyone did or not, but you can't just ignore this issue of an irregular heartbeat.
You glossed over the part where it "can occasionaly provoke cardiac arrhythmias." In case you didn't know, that means an irregular heartbeat. You can die from having an irregular heartbeat; people suffering from anorexia frequently die from cardiac arrhythmias (when they don't die from suicide).
Maybe I'm mistaken, but does Obama really have any direct control over what the lawyers at the Dept. of Justice say and do? Also, I can see the justification for not releasing the torture photos. Publicizing them could lead to more violence. The principal issue is just to make sure that the torture isn't repeated in the future.
There's a lot of other variables besides culture that are involved in why Europeans and Asians consistently dominated the new world in warfare. Geography and biodiversity, for example. See Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs & Steel" for an interesting discussion on the reasons behind the course of history.
But yeah, apologizing for defeating an enemy is pretty lame. Of course, we committed mass genocide on those who surrendered by forcing them on mass migrations into small, infertile reservations where they died of starvation, as in the "Trail of Tears." That's pretty lame too.
I know what it says. You're just repeating yourself. But using this strict constructionist interpretation, you might as well argue that they can't have computers at all, since having computers is not a power delegated to the US by the constitution.
Computers can be used to help the federal government engage in the tasks they are assigned by the constitution. Keeping those computers secure is a matter of national security. Therefore it would be totally unreasonable to say that they can't engage in securing those computers.
Maybe the miscommunication here is that the cybersecurity czar is being assigned some task that falls outside of the scope of simply securing the federal government's computers against tampering?
the same military, might I add, that goes and fights and dies for their freedom to express their opinion and peacefully protest in the first place
Because clearly we wouldn't have freedom of speech if the military hadn't carpet-bombed Afghanistan, and sending our young men and women halfway across the world to die in some desert instead of keeping them here to defend our homeland is a very intelligent plan of action.
When the military is engaged in a lot of bad decisions, it's reasonable to expect that people will begin to discourage other people from enlisting.
It would only be unconstitutional if the federal cybersecurity agency started telling state agencies how to conduct their security operations. There's nothing unconstitutional about the federal government creating an agency or a position to oversee their own resources.
One day the United States and the EU will read Atlas Shrugged see the light and in a fit of teenage angst convert to Libertarianism and the dark masters of those sinister, malevolent corporations who just love to exploit everybody will all become transhuman masters of the universe while their slaves and mid-level managers toil in constant labor and agony.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is funny because a large part of the cost (of any product) is the shipping, even though a wine shipped halfway across the world might not taste better than a wine shipped across your own state. Or made in your backyard.
You can't really blame Americans for the economic crisis, just because everybody made bad leveraged investments in their homes and now they don't want to buy all your factory-made gimmicks, reducing worldwide demand. I guess you should have grown food and relied on local demand for expansion instead.
Of course, maybe foreign direct investment wrecked your economy by building all of the gimmicky factories instead of farms like you needed. But you should have regulated your industry to make sure your people won't starve (assuming you're bitching at America from an LDC instead of somewhere posh like France).
Wait, except that the IMF tends to withdraw relief grants from countries that regulate their marketplace and limit foreign direct investment ... and that the CIA tends to assassinate any powerful anti-american political figures in countries who resist the expansion. So maybe you can blame us for the economic crisis.
Oh well ... at least we win, sort of! America, fuck yeah!
Sounds like somebody just got laid off. To me the "rational thing" is to minimize transaction costs between buyers and sellers in the marketplace in terms of both money and time. Newspaper classifieds cost more money and take longer to print. For example, someone I know recently sold a trailer on craigslist. They got a response within 2 days of posting the ad and sold it to the same responder within a week for their asking price. Posting the ad was free. Running a classified ad would have cost money and possibly taken weeks to reach potential sellers.
This has nothign to do with a megalomaniac need to control. It's just good business sense. The internet is way better for classified ads than your little cart-and-buggy newspaper industry. So get off of your luddite soapbox.
Journalists still have value to society; mostly because they're willing to do investigative journalism to root out the corruption in industry and government, and war journalism where they risk their lives to document events that most people wouldn't see otherwise. But running a monopolistic print classified ad business that burdens buyers and sellers with high transaction costs isn't valuable to society, and it doesn't take a first-rate journalist, just a printing press and some book keepers, and maybe some hired goons to beat up people who dare to try this newfangled "internet" business instead of paying the traditional tolls and fees to wealthy capitalists who happen to own printing presses.
What do gambling sites have to do with the suicide of a 12-year-old?
Also, I find it funny that the response to a boy committing suicide when he was banned from playing games is to ban the entire country from playing games.
Craigslist charges listing fees for real estate ads and job offer ads in major metropolitan centers. I'm pretty sure they are raking in a huge amount of cash.
Whoever modded this offtopic is a total drag. I suggested a viable solution to the problem that the GP brought up as a parallel to the RIAA problem. The drug war is one of our biggest economic wastes ... kind of like the music industry!
Maybe the bathroom attendant has to wash and fold all of those towels at the end of the night. That might be worth a tip.
I've never been to a hotel with busboys or anyone who showed me where the bathroom is. Sounds pretty silly.
If the place was really worthy of a bathroom attendant then he'd hand you a cloth towel, not a paper one.
Seems to me that the engineer is the proper nemesis of the spy, not the sniper.
The first one is to hand you a towel to dry your hands with, and receive a tip for doing so.
You calling 911 and 911 calling you are two different things. The law probably doesn't cover the latter.
Ah wait, I'm an idiot, arrythmias are caused by hypokalemia. For some reason I thought I had read that in the summary instead of your quotation. So I suppose your point stands, nobody died from this. It seems like they could though, an irregular heartbeat is a serious condition.
Hypokalemia and cardiac arrhythmias are two different conditions. One is not caused by the other. Just because nobody died from hypokalemia doesn't mean nobody died from cardiac arrhthmias. I don't know if anyone did or not, but you can't just ignore this issue of an irregular heartbeat.
A person like that can do something bad to another person without even a second thought and no conscience
I think you're making an ass out of you and umption.
You glossed over the part where it "can occasionaly provoke cardiac arrhythmias." In case you didn't know, that means an irregular heartbeat. You can die from having an irregular heartbeat; people suffering from anorexia frequently die from cardiac arrhythmias (when they don't die from suicide).
Isn't anybody shooting at you a combatant by default?
Clearly, men have no responsibility to raise their children. Wait, what?
Maybe I'm mistaken, but does Obama really have any direct control over what the lawyers at the Dept. of Justice say and do? Also, I can see the justification for not releasing the torture photos. Publicizing them could lead to more violence. The principal issue is just to make sure that the torture isn't repeated in the future.
There's a lot of other variables besides culture that are involved in why Europeans and Asians consistently dominated the new world in warfare. Geography and biodiversity, for example. See Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs & Steel" for an interesting discussion on the reasons behind the course of history.
But yeah, apologizing for defeating an enemy is pretty lame. Of course, we committed mass genocide on those who surrendered by forcing them on mass migrations into small, infertile reservations where they died of starvation, as in the "Trail of Tears." That's pretty lame too.
I know what it says. You're just repeating yourself. But using this strict constructionist interpretation, you might as well argue that they can't have computers at all, since having computers is not a power delegated to the US by the constitution.
Computers can be used to help the federal government engage in the tasks they are assigned by the constitution. Keeping those computers secure is a matter of national security. Therefore it would be totally unreasonable to say that they can't engage in securing those computers.
Maybe the miscommunication here is that the cybersecurity czar is being assigned some task that falls outside of the scope of simply securing the federal government's computers against tampering?
the same military, might I add, that goes and fights and dies for their freedom to express their opinion and peacefully protest in the first place
Because clearly we wouldn't have freedom of speech if the military hadn't carpet-bombed Afghanistan, and sending our young men and women halfway across the world to die in some desert instead of keeping them here to defend our homeland is a very intelligent plan of action.
When the military is engaged in a lot of bad decisions, it's reasonable to expect that people will begin to discourage other people from enlisting.
It would only be unconstitutional if the federal cybersecurity agency started telling state agencies how to conduct their security operations. There's nothing unconstitutional about the federal government creating an agency or a position to oversee their own resources.
Hey, at least somebody gets to be the transhuman master of the universe.
Oh, I got the joke. He was trying to be ironic. I thought maybe I could help it be a little funnier with a juxtaposition.
Of course I was only half-joking myself.
One day the United States and the EU will read Atlas Shrugged see the light and in a fit of teenage angst convert to Libertarianism and the dark masters of those sinister, malevolent corporations who just love to exploit everybody will all become transhuman masters of the universe while their slaves and mid-level managers toil in constant labor and agony.
There, I fixed it for you.