I was also thinking of internal company e-mails & memos. Of course, if that's what they're sending out then they should really use their own mail server and not hotmail, but...
Record companies take so much from the artist that the old $10 - $25 concert tickets are $45* - $75 and up
What makes you so sure that the change in price can't be entirely accounted for by general inflation?
There's no way for me (or anyone else) to tell, if you don't let us know what year the tickets used to cost $10-$25. For the love of God, try to maintain a little objectivity here.
It is not a legitimate resource that you would use while writing a proposal you intend to turn in to your boss
I call bullshit. While Wikipedia is not an acceptable source to cite in a professional document, I think it's an amazing springboard for research if you are disciplined, and only use the primary-source citations that the Wiki editors use themselves (after investigating their credibility yourself, of course).
Personally, I think that prohibiting access to Wikipedia from any Dept. of Agriculture computer is a bad idea -- it keeps the employees there from accessing a large repository of knowledge, some of which could no doubt assist them with their jobs from time to time.
A better idea would be to block access to the Wiki pages that allow you to edit the website, while still allowing workers to review the information already there.
Of course, now that the Dept. of Agriculture employees realize that all of their websurfing at work can be easily monitored and documented, there's probably not even a need to block these websites.
Fear will keep the local technicians in line... fear of this surveillance station (sorry, I had to).
Yet, for all of the collective intelligence of the geek community, we'd rather sit on our collective asses and whine, rather than actually do something about the abuses of patent law.
That's because this is a market economy, and no one wants to do uncompensated labor.
That's a big "perhaps" without a correlation, or even a theory, to back up your idea. It's complete supposition; and as a Gen-Y college student who has spent most of his free time since adolescence with his computer, I can't really endorse the hypothesis that speedy access to information causes a short attention span. In fact, I'd argue that mass media is likely more to blame, and that is a product of previous generations (brainless sitcoms and 30-second commercials on television, anyone?).
I use my rapid access to information to, say, look up ideas that were mentioned (but not expanded on) in economics class. If I had a laptop in class, I'd just learn faster and more efficiently, because I wouldn't have to wait to go home to look them up.
In other words, you're saying we're taking money from the people so that it can be redistributed to the people. You forget that the defense contractors take a huge bite out of that as profits. If that money was left in the hands of the citizens
Stop right there. The defense contractors ARE citizens, they ARE the people, and money gained as "profit" is still profit to the economy as a whole, regardless of who gets it, because that money will be respent elsewhere on investments or goods.
I would rather give the money to successful firms and individuals who are highly educated, and proven to be competent money-managers by their station, than spend it "generally" by simply writing everyone who has a pulse and knows their name a check from Uncle Sam. That would be the real waste.
Of course, if you wanted to argue that there's more opportunity cost associated with investing in war rather than investing in say, public math and technology education, I'd probably agree with you. But I won't sit idly by and allow you to proclaim that giving the money to American defense contractors does nothing for the American economy.
Besides, if we under-invest in long-term strategies like education, we can still get ahead by investing in weaponry and using it to blow everyone else to smithereens! Then we'll have a comparative advantage in production, and continue to be the world's foremost superpower, despite the fact that we're less advanced than we could have been. After all, you don't have to be as advanced as you could be, you just have to be more advanced than everyone else!
I learned that from Civilization 4. I think there's something to it.
The broken window fallacy seems to specifically refer to a broken window -- the actual destruction of property. You might have a bias which makes you think that the military industry is little more than the destruction of property, but it actually is much more than that.
The money is being spent on improved weaponry -- the research of it, as well as the mass production of it. That creates an enormous number of jobs, many of which are jobs that require a college education. "Research" and "production" are no easy tasks, and many of the workers will be engineers with advanced understandings of calculus, physics, and chemistry. It takes a little bit more of an investment to design modern weaponry than it does to just throw rocks at windows, which is simple vandalism.
The economic surge in the U.S. after the beginning of WW2 was a direct result of the gov't investing in war production -- it created jobs.
Slashdot Mirror
That sounds like cartel and probably highly illegal under American copyright law,
You mean anti-trust law.
I cannot see how this computer would be all that much greener in the long run
Making "green" appliances isn't the answer. Electricity itself is inherently green; it's where we GET the electricity that sometimes causes problems.
A more accurate headline would have been, "Details of Chinese Internet Censorship Revealed."
I was also thinking of internal company e-mails & memos. Of course, if that's what they're sending out then they should really use their own mail server and not hotmail, but ...
Who needs to send to more than 10 people at a time anyway
Oh, I don't know ... Newsgroups? Businesses?
Maybe they should fix their spellchecker first.
I thought it was "news for nerds," not "news for techies."
Record companies take so much from the artist that the old $10 - $25 concert tickets are $45* - $75 and up
What makes you so sure that the change in price can't be entirely accounted for by general inflation?
There's no way for me (or anyone else) to tell, if you don't let us know what year the tickets used to cost $10-$25. For the love of God, try to maintain a little objectivity here.
I personally have had bad experiences with them, so there's your citation.
You're anonymous. How the hell is that a citation?
I own my own small business ... and I try to uphold the greatest ethical standards possible
You aren't doing it right.
It is not a legitimate resource that you would use while writing a proposal you intend to turn in to your boss
I call bullshit. While Wikipedia is not an acceptable source to cite in a professional document, I think it's an amazing springboard for research if you are disciplined, and only use the primary-source citations that the Wiki editors use themselves (after investigating their credibility yourself, of course).
Personally, I think that prohibiting access to Wikipedia from any Dept. of Agriculture computer is a bad idea -- it keeps the employees there from accessing a large repository of knowledge, some of which could no doubt assist them with their jobs from time to time.
A better idea would be to block access to the Wiki pages that allow you to edit the website, while still allowing workers to review the information already there.
Of course, now that the Dept. of Agriculture employees realize that all of their websurfing at work can be easily monitored and documented, there's probably not even a need to block these websites.
Fear will keep the local technicians in line ... fear of this surveillance station (sorry, I had to).
Yet, for all of the collective intelligence of the geek community, we'd rather sit on our collective asses and whine, rather than actually do something about the abuses of patent law.
That's because this is a market economy, and no one wants to do uncompensated labor.
If they could get it, they wouldn't pirate.
Not necessarily ... a lot of the people pirating those things are also the people pirating domestic media.
this is why things are so expensive in the United States
Please provide some evidence for your claims. This is about objectivity, not supposition.
That's a big "perhaps" without a correlation, or even a theory, to back up your idea. It's complete supposition; and as a Gen-Y college student who has spent most of his free time since adolescence with his computer, I can't really endorse the hypothesis that speedy access to information causes a short attention span. In fact, I'd argue that mass media is likely more to blame, and that is a product of previous generations (brainless sitcoms and 30-second commercials on television, anyone?).
I use my rapid access to information to, say, look up ideas that were mentioned (but not expanded on) in economics class. If I had a laptop in class, I'd just learn faster and more efficiently, because I wouldn't have to wait to go home to look them up.
Actually, the Sony software actually
Like, no way? Actually?
and has systematically destroyed partnerships with individuals and Berkeley businesses.
In true wikipedia style, I declare that this [Needs Citation].
Yes, when WILL the madness end!? And when will we start thinking of the children!?
Yeah, but you're all way older than me, I'm just a starving second-year college student. I never played Civilization 3, or anything before it either.
Also, I linked you to this post in the other thread without realizing that you had already posted over here. Silly me.
Instead of rephrasing my statements, I'll just link you to my other thread of conversation on this topic.
Of course, if you wanted to argue that there's more opportunity cost associated with investing in war rather than investing in say, public math and technology education, I'd probably agree with you. But I won't sit idly by and allow you to proclaim that giving the money to American defense contractors does nothing for the American economy.
Half of IT Workers Sleep on the Job
I'm majoring in human resource management ... it's good to know that there's still work out there to be done.
In other words, you're saying we're taking money from the people so that it can be redistributed to the people. You forget that the defense contractors take a huge bite out of that as profits. If that money was left in the hands of the citizens
Stop right there. The defense contractors ARE citizens, they ARE the people, and money gained as "profit" is still profit to the economy as a whole, regardless of who gets it, because that money will be respent elsewhere on investments or goods.
I would rather give the money to successful firms and individuals who are highly educated, and proven to be competent money-managers by their station, than spend it "generally" by simply writing everyone who has a pulse and knows their name a check from Uncle Sam. That would be the real waste.
Of course, if you wanted to argue that there's more opportunity cost associated with investing in war rather than investing in say, public math and technology education, I'd probably agree with you. But I won't sit idly by and allow you to proclaim that giving the money to American defense contractors does nothing for the American economy.
Besides, if we under-invest in long-term strategies like education, we can still get ahead by investing in weaponry and using it to blow everyone else to smithereens! Then we'll have a comparative advantage in production, and continue to be the world's foremost superpower, despite the fact that we're less advanced than we could have been. After all, you don't have to be as advanced as you could be, you just have to be more advanced than everyone else!
I learned that from Civilization 4. I think there's something to it.
Broken window fallacy.
The broken window fallacy seems to specifically refer to a broken window -- the actual destruction of property. You might have a bias which makes you think that the military industry is little more than the destruction of property, but it actually is much more than that.
The money is being spent on improved weaponry -- the research of it, as well as the mass production of it. That creates an enormous number of jobs, many of which are jobs that require a college education. "Research" and "production" are no easy tasks, and many of the workers will be engineers with advanced understandings of calculus, physics, and chemistry. It takes a little bit more of an investment to design modern weaponry than it does to just throw rocks at windows, which is simple vandalism.
The economic surge in the U.S. after the beginning of WW2 was a direct result of the gov't investing in war production -- it created jobs.
As G. Edward Griffin makes clear in his book, none of these beliefs are true
He got $20k out of it. That's not getting ahead.
Breaking the law willfully, and breaking the law willfully with wisdom and skill, are two different things.