Now imagine an Earth where only managers and bankers and politicians will survive. The living will envy the dead.
Fixed that for you.
On the phone, you're paying by the bit. This means even the extra text that gets sent across the air to your phone is costing you money....
The answer to why mobile advertising remains largely untapped is fairly obvious: it directly impacts the customer's wallet.
Hmmm, what if there was some way for the advertiser to pay you back for the bandwidth they used? Like a discount on your phone bill later? And if you clicked on the ad they would pay for all further bits sent to your device while on their website. Or maybe the phone enters a "free" download state that is indicated to the user somehow And if you purchased from them they would discount your phone bill even more.
Yes, those 'help', but the hardware comes out of the same factories, with the same ethics, as most other electronics. So the problem is reduced, but not eliminated.
Make your own candles?
Is there any practical application to this sort of thing, either having the number itself, or whatever method this guy used to arrive at it? Or is this a thumb gazing exercise?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H20cKjz-bjw
As an American citizen, if I go live and work in Ireland, or anywhere else, without ANY ties to the US at all, I still am required to pay US Federal income tax on the money I earn(in addition to that countries taxes.)
Nope, if you live in Ireland you do not have to pay US Federal tax. You only have to pay federal tax on money you earn from the USA. That also includes payroll taxes. However, you will not be paying into social security or medicare and that can affect your benefits later. What you cannot do is pretend you live in Ireland, and still make money in the USA. That is what GE is doing.
Agreed.
- Women are their husband's property. - Homosexuals should be stoned. - Unruly children should be stoned. - When ordered by God we should kill not just men but also women and children when invading a country. - Eat a lobster and die. - Divorce and be stoned. - Etc...
I mean, discarding all of the scientific nonsense is a no-brainer. But we really need to get back to the good book as a source of moral authority.
Ok, no disrespect to you for seeing it that way, but I have to intervene and make a case for the Bible. It is much more subtle and nuanced than that characterization. Christians and non-Christians alike make this same mistake about the Bible. The laws in the Old Testament are not meant to be followed by me or you. They were for the Jewish nation state. The New Testament makes a clear break with the Old in terms of superseding it in many ways. The dietary laws are done away with- Peter is given a vision of "forbidden" animals in Acts and told to eat them as they are now "made clean" (other examples abound in the NT). The ceremonial laws are done away with as argued in the book of Hebrews which makes the case that the sacrificial system was simply symbolic and no longer should exist "The blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin". The eye for and eye motif is superseded: "Do not take vengeance, vengeance is mine says the Lord" and Jesus' "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you". Women are called equal to men- unheard of in any ancient literature I know of: "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Jesus had women followers who sat and learned from him and later women were leaders in the first century Christian movement: "Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house." Lastly, the moral law is superseded in that it no longer needs to be followed: "I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” The Law is replaced by the call to love one another "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law."
The law of Moses to which your post refers was a stepping stone to Christian morality and it was actually a system for a specific people of a specific time. Much Western morality has come from the Bible and some of that is good: "Do unto others", "Good Samaritan", etc. Whenever somebody tries to take it from the Dietary/Ceremonial/Moral Mosaic law, it usually causes trouble.
As an analogy, discounting Christianity because of the Mosaic law is a bit like discounting evolution because strict Darwinism doesn't work. E.g. a fanatic creationist could poke holes in Darwinism and a scientist would protest because we don't interpret the evidence that way anymore (like in Punctuated equilibrium, etc.). I realize the analogy is not perfect but I hope you get the point.
You could of course still make the case as to why those harsh laws are there to begin with and I think there are answers to that, but I do hope you can see how even the morality you use to judge those things as "bad" is in part influenced by the morality that superseded them.
P.S. I don't think even the OT called women their husbands' property
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion