In other words, the wealth would gravitate to those most likely to do something with it that will ultimately improve all our lives. Really not seeing the problem here, and I'm not even a libertarian.
If anything, the New Deal aggravated the Depression (and Roosevelt's 'court-packing' threat led to our current disturbing increase in federal power). Then again, with WW2, we paid a hell of a lot more into it (in both money and lives) than we ever got out of it. (It was the last war we unquestionably 'won', but we overthrew bloodthirsty dictators in Berlin and Tokyo just to see them crop up in Moscow and Beijing).
Intel's open source drivers really aren't; it's completely undocumented vendor supplied code. ATI followed the same model before the Xbox 360 contract came up, and it's likely what they're going to return to.
Don't know if I'd call it innovative; the basic idea goes back to the Twelve Tables in the Roman days. Common Law, OTOH, is like a vestigal sixth finger on the hand of the US criminal justice system.
Sure, that approach works with a fairly linear game like an old-school RPG. How in the hell are you going to integrate disc switching with something like a sports game or an MMO? At best, it's an annoyance.
I've heard this enough times, but I still don't buy it. Aside from what movie studios do, there's perfectly valid reasons for Sony to back the Blu-Ray format (ie 4.7GB just doesn't cut it anymore, and nobody wants to go back to the PSX solution of multiple discs). Granted, that makes the PS3 an overpriced electronic toy, but what electronic toy isn't?
5.) Destroying the world economy by artificially raising fuel prices to ridiculous levels (while giving the world's 2nd and 4th largest economies a free pass) is going to create a better world for us than just dealing with the previous 4.
War didn't change shit. Federal power has increased because more people expect more things from government, and delivering these things is a quick way for demagogues to find their way into power. Not only does government have to protect us from the use of force (the sole legitimate function of any government), it has to feed us if we can't feed ourselves, take care of us if we're sick, lame, or lazy, make up for our inability to save for retirement, etc. Most people are scared shitless of freedom (true freedom, after all, is the freedom to starve) and don't want to think for themselves.
Hmm, maybe something to do with the fact that the EV1 was a $500 million white elephant? Sure, people would have wanted to buy them, but at $35,000 a pop? Hybrids sound like a better business model, and bigger batteries and plug-in capacity will eventually get us there anyway.
Not all reprocessing involves breeder reactors or plutonium. Current core lives of pressurized water reactors only use a small fraction of the U-235 within (fission product poisons and temperature concerns (water reactor + lower temp needed for criticality = potential for massive power excursion and lots of Blinkies) dictate exactly when, but I've heard anywhere from 1 to 10 percent). Just getting rid of the poisons and placing the uranium within new fuel elements would boost efficiency considerably, but current law and technical concerns (I like my gonads the way they are) prevent this.
I'm not so much opposed to a 95-year term as much as the fact that they're free to extend it again any time they wish. (I've heard whisperings that this is to protect Mickey Mouse, but that seems kinda silly considering the name and likeness are covered by trademarks, which don't expire as long as they're used). Trying to offer up some sort of moral defense to piracy on the other hand is something I consider inherently absurd. They whine about DRM; they're the ones causing it by their actions. They whine about length of copyright; most of the works they filch are recent ones. They whine about "corporate greed"; they'll happily help themselves to its products. The artist is getting pennies from the CD sale; he or she gets nothing from LimeWire. At least anti-IP groups like the FSF or Creative Commons only play Santa Claus with their own works.
A ports system doesn't necessarily preclude the package management system you seem to have in mind (in fact similar things are possible using FreeBSD's command line package tools). pkgsrc, on the other hand, is IMO like trying to shove your foot up your own ass without the rewarding upside.
How do you "curtail" corporate rights without curtailing the rights of the people (like you, who have clear-cut constitutional rights) who have chosen to invest capital in that corporation?
If the rights of the members were upheld, I could see with doing away with corporate personhood; it really wouldn't change anything in cases like this though (instead of Verizon claiming their right to free speech, it'd be Verizon's shareholders claiming their right to free speech).
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, the wealth would gravitate to those most likely to do something with it that will ultimately improve all our lives. Really not seeing the problem here, and I'm not even a libertarian.
Well, uh, maybe they should aim for something a little bit higher than minimum wage? I dunno, maybe pay attention in school or something?
If anything, the New Deal aggravated the Depression (and Roosevelt's 'court-packing' threat led to our current disturbing increase in federal power). Then again, with WW2, we paid a hell of a lot more into it (in both money and lives) than we ever got out of it. (It was the last war we unquestionably 'won', but we overthrew bloodthirsty dictators in Berlin and Tokyo just to see them crop up in Moscow and Beijing).
Which is why ATI drivers before r300 were open source?
Intel's open source drivers really aren't; it's completely undocumented vendor supplied code. ATI followed the same model before the Xbox 360 contract came up, and it's likely what they're going to return to.
With the r500 series, ATI's already eliminated separate 2d acceleration. It's only a matter of time before nvidia does the same.
Don't know if I'd call it innovative; the basic idea goes back to the Twelve Tables in the Roman days. Common Law, OTOH, is like a vestigal sixth finger on the hand of the US criminal justice system.
http://www.greyhound.com/
The two aren't mutually exclusive, you know.
Sure, that approach works with a fairly linear game like an old-school RPG. How in the hell are you going to integrate disc switching with something like a sports game or an MMO? At best, it's an annoyance.
I've heard this enough times, but I still don't buy it. Aside from what movie studios do, there's perfectly valid reasons for Sony to back the Blu-Ray format (ie 4.7GB just doesn't cut it anymore, and nobody wants to go back to the PSX solution of multiple discs). Granted, that makes the PS3 an overpriced electronic toy, but what electronic toy isn't?
You forgot:
5.) Destroying the world economy by artificially raising fuel prices to ridiculous levels (while giving the world's 2nd and 4th largest economies a free pass) is going to create a better world for us than just dealing with the previous 4.
They improvise, they adapt, they overcome. Same as any other species whose overall fate is something other than "part of the fossil record."
War didn't change shit. Federal power has increased because more people expect more things from government, and delivering these things is a quick way for demagogues to find their way into power. Not only does government have to protect us from the use of force (the sole legitimate function of any government), it has to feed us if we can't feed ourselves, take care of us if we're sick, lame, or lazy, make up for our inability to save for retirement, etc. Most people are scared shitless of freedom (true freedom, after all, is the freedom to starve) and don't want to think for themselves.
That's assuming the dollars are fungible. Investors in motor companies likely don't care about electric power generation, and vice versa.
Hmm, maybe something to do with the fact that the EV1 was a $500 million white elephant? Sure, people would have wanted to buy them, but at $35,000 a pop? Hybrids sound like a better business model, and bigger batteries and plug-in capacity will eventually get us there anyway.
Not all reprocessing involves breeder reactors or plutonium. Current core lives of pressurized water reactors only use a small fraction of the U-235 within (fission product poisons and temperature concerns (water reactor + lower temp needed for criticality = potential for massive power excursion and lots of Blinkies) dictate exactly when, but I've heard anywhere from 1 to 10 percent). Just getting rid of the poisons and placing the uranium within new fuel elements would boost efficiency considerably, but current law and technical concerns (I like my gonads the way they are) prevent this.
That's why you put weight on the rear axle.
I'm not so much opposed to a 95-year term as much as the fact that they're free to extend it again any time they wish. (I've heard whisperings that this is to protect Mickey Mouse, but that seems kinda silly considering the name and likeness are covered by trademarks, which don't expire as long as they're used). Trying to offer up some sort of moral defense to piracy on the other hand is something I consider inherently absurd. They whine about DRM; they're the ones causing it by their actions. They whine about length of copyright; most of the works they filch are recent ones. They whine about "corporate greed"; they'll happily help themselves to its products. The artist is getting pennies from the CD sale; he or she gets nothing from LimeWire. At least anti-IP groups like the FSF or Creative Commons only play Santa Claus with their own works.
A ports system doesn't necessarily preclude the package management system you seem to have in mind (in fact similar things are possible using FreeBSD's command line package tools). pkgsrc, on the other hand, is IMO like trying to shove your foot up your own ass without the rewarding upside.
How do you "curtail" corporate rights without curtailing the rights of the people (like you, who have clear-cut constitutional rights) who have chosen to invest capital in that corporation?
Sure, there can be consequences; there just can't be *government* consequences.
Perhaps if the person in question was a 'confidential CIA operative' at the time her identity was leaked...
No, it wouldn't, because a corporation is just a group of individual people, acting in a common interest.
If the rights of the members were upheld, I could see with doing away with corporate personhood; it really wouldn't change anything in cases like this though (instead of Verizon claiming their right to free speech, it'd be Verizon's shareholders claiming their right to free speech).