I'm none too happy with the banks myself, property bubbles completely loot middle class wealth and that needs to never happen again, but look at all the posters in this story gibbering about equality of income - do they have any understanding of how insane that is? Clearly not.

So they indulge in masturbatory fantasies about the indefinable paradise that awaits humanity after all the bourgeoise are killed off. Or was that the jews. No, wait, the intellectuals. White men?

Better they use their minds instead of parroting the delusions of a nineteenth century habitual drunk.

Suck it youngsters!

I live in Virginia Beach and still have a copper POTS line with Verizon -- my TV and internet are via coax from Cox. Having copper has it's advantages, like (1) still working in an extended power outage, (2) not having to pay for the replacement battery in the eMTA modem and (3) being able to get phone service from third-party provider. Once you switch to FiOS or simply phone over fiber, you're stuck having to use Verizon over that media and they will *not* ever switch you back to copper.

During one of the last bad hurricanes that caused an extended power outage of a few days, copper landlines were of the few working phones (land or wireless) in my neighborhood / area. I've only been w/o phone service *once* here since 1985, when the power when out across the city for over a week after a hurricane, when the Verizon generators finally ran out of fuel.

"Our" resource distribution system, capitalism, has regulations to prevent corruption from doing too much damage. It's a bit hit and miss but overall things have been steadily improving for the average person.

The distribution systems in poor countries may or may not have similar regulations, but they aren't enforced if they are in place. Having lived in many such countries I know whereof I speak.

I wasn't aware you'd been elected king of the economists. Apologies your royal spokesperson for Mises and Keynes, perhaps someday someone will do communism right and not end up killing 100 million people to achieve nothing. The congratulatory coronation fruitbasket shall be along in the post presently.

Ahahaha! I swear you marxists live in as much of a fairy tale world as any conspiracy nut.

The reason poor countries are poor is because of their shitty corrupt politicians. See for reference what happened to Zimbabwe, or the President of South Africa looting all of the UK foreign aid to build his palace, or the way that the government in the Philippines can't account for over 90% of the aid it received for Haiyan.

"Derived directly from our resource-limited past" my ass, the only thing that matches the zeal of the marxist is their ignorance.

So, in your world all the money in the banks is owned by a few super rich people, and they can just take it with them and go to New Zealand.

Maybe Huey, Dewey, and Louie will save the day?

Ahahaha you people. Seriously, which do you think is more important to the 99% or whatever, the fact that their standard of living is continually improving, or that someone is shopping for her third sports car, somewhere out there.

Moral panic mongers are finding this whole information age thing quite the botherance, aren't they.

Not really no, for example during the French revolution which supposedly directly targeted the wealthy, the majority of those that went to visit Madame were not nobles.

I'm not entirely sure what the fixation is with income equality anyway, shouldn't people be thinking more about a continually improving standard of living? I mean surely that's what matters most to almost everyone. I know I don't wake up every morning bitterly jealous that someone else is richer them myself, or upset that I can't buy a Lear jet, seems like a pretty sorry way to go through life.

I don't have a problem with people being richer than me as long as they aren't using their wealth to fuck with people, like the banks did with their artificially inflated property bubble. Yes, when one party is providing 90+ % of the price for a good or service, that party controls the price. So, fuck the banks basically. But not due for ideological reasons.

You could say the same about almost any skilled labour though, good enough is often good enough. I agree with what you're saying but it doesn't make what I'm saying less true.

I have nothing against people being rich, if they got there honestly and without coercion. Government lobbying, for example, is one form of coercion because it influences regulation of others via money.

But let's face it: most of them did not get there quite honestly or without resorting to coercion. And in fact, regulations helped to get them there. Not only is that obvious on its face, you can see it in the statistics: the more "statist" and regulatory governments have been, the less well economies have done and the more income inequality we've seen.

Now they're proposing to try to fix the problem they created, by doing more of what created it. Typical government idiocy.

And as for "unrest", they aren't going to be able to regulate that away. On the contrary: at least here in the U.S., if they don't start lightening up on Federal regulation, they're going to see far worse problems and more unrest than they have so far.

The only way it would put cops in danger were if someone were out there with the sole intention of killing cops... and not some particular cop, but any cop. Because the app just says "cop", not who.

So either this sherriff's association has their heads completely up their asses, or what they're really doing is boo-hooing over the fact that people are interfering with their daily traffic ticket quota. Which means they have their heads up their asses, because what they should be doing is solving crimes.

Nope, let's not even justify it to that extent. Coding is a job description, and an increasingly blue collar one like plumber or electrician at that. This whole push by giant corporations to get into schools (!) is simply a means for them to reduce future worker salaries and ensure a steady supply of bright young idiots all fresh'n'ready to be abused and burned out.

End of.

Not just companies. The political network overseen by the Koch brothers is getting ready to spend $900 Million on the 2016 elections.

"on board" ... "in bed" - whatever. Wear a condom Congress-critters and feel lucky. Most of "we the people" have to wear two when taking it from - I mean "dealing with" - Comcast.

I would also like to point out that the cited page about promissory estoppel did in fact use the word gratuitous, but then went on to explain situations that meet the definition of consideration on the part of the promissee.

Their actual example is clearly a case in which there was to be consideration on both sides.

Perhaps it is not a good example.

There is a lot of gray here. For example, some "public" licenses promise that a work will remain in the public domain. Not all do.

Real-world example: rights to the Java programming language were "purchased" by Oracle while the license was public domain. However, Oracle chose to make later versions not entirely public domain. The original license was not sufficient to guarantee the whole product would be public domain in perpetuity.

There is currently no law in the U.S. which requires something in the public domain to remain that way, unless it is so stipulated in the license. There are a number of famous cases in which something that was once public domain is no longer, even though that thing remained otherwise unchanged.

EFF and others are working to change that. But until it is changed, the concept of Promissory Estoppel only applies in some cases of public domain licensing.