If you build your employer a piece of software that ends up making hundreds of millions of dollars wouldn't you feel entitled to some of that wealth?
No. You utilized their assets to build said software, charged them money, and agreed to it. Deal with it. Just because you lacked the vision to see that software making piles of cash, don't blame others because they have bigger vision then you do.
Reverse discrimination.
Sorry, but discrimination is discrimination. There is no direction. It either takes place or it doesn't. Using the term reverse gives advantage and power to one group over another.
So would you argue that affirmative action and hiring/acceptance quotas are discrimination since they put a higher value on some races than they do others?
At some point they become discrimination and defeatist in nature to everyone involved with society. But I am also a realist, and understand that at one point there was a need to have these practices in place in the U.S. And I think that they will still exist in some form or another, but not enforced. There are many industries in the US who's work force is not diversified at all or are becoming of one particular background.
What is a proper percentage of bodies of a particular ethnic background/gender/sexual preference/religious preference is a company to have? Is it guided by local community, state community, country population, or world population?
Frankly, I could care less. This is still the U.S. and if you can't work for someone, go start your own business and fight for your business. Life is not fair. The sooner you accept that and move on, the happier you will be.
Reverse discrimination.
Sorry, but discrimination is discrimination. There is no direction. It either takes place or it doesn't. Using the term reverse gives advantage and power to one group over another.
Doesn't that mean we are winning the race for species domination just as every other species on Earth attempts and has attempted to do until resources cause the decline?
The reality is Earth's clock is ticking. All resources need to be exhausted to find a way off of this rock or sustain life in the harsher confines of deep space. Otherwise, what are we really doing with our advantage over all the other species past and present? You want a long term goal for humanity? There it is. Survival of the species beyond the scope of the planet for wence it came.
but being a plumber or AC repair can't be shipped overseas.
No, those jobs will not be shipped overseas, they will disappear. Look at the modular advancement of products. I do see a future where an HVAC system will be plug and play with parts sold at your local home depot. As for plumbing, why not use a "Lego" brand plumbing where "pipe A" connects to "pipe B" and snaps into place.
People can and will be replaced as technology advances. The goal is cheap and disposable with minimal impact on quality. Manufacturing jobs are dead and a thing of the past. We all have to get over that. The jobs will either be in services or distribution itself.
So what happens when the first plane has a power blip, or an engine failure? How can you land with no view?
Airline pilots have what is known as an Instrument Flight Rating for a reason. They don't depend on looking out the window to fly.
Well, this is just a quicker way to increase passenger space by letting the pilots fly your plane from the comfort of their ipad at home.
"The only reason to outsource is because of the massive shortage of tech workers." I call bullshit grande. I'm living through an outsource right now and it's ALL ABOUT COST. The existing help desk, first level support, and second level support were shown the door and replaced with 50% off bargain employees from Elbonia and elsewhere. Competence had zero to do with it. Uptime of our apps has tanked, ticket queues are ballooning, the new support folks can't find their ass with both hands and a map... but they sure are cheaper.
But wasn't ITIL the magic bullet to solve the inexperience issue that is always heard around help desk/tier support locations?
I bet you if he wrote about child pornography or terrorism it would be a different story.
Is it? If so, why?
Yes. Public (or press projected) perception, sensativity, and/or fear.
Although a terrorism writing may have more latitude since shows like 24 are all the rage.
Reading the article is seemed like it was pulled straight from an episode of Criminal Minds IMO.
I bet you if he wrote about child pornography or terrorism it would be a different story.
However, I agree with the judgement. It's a very slippery slop once that line is crossed and you have to take the good with the bad when you want ANY freedom.
When your goal is 12,000,000 and have the support of Mr. Wozniak and he believes in your PAC, why not just get the money from him?
(I mean, if I have billions and a topic I support, and 12 million wouldn't make me lose sleep. Just saying.)
Heck, he could start a PR firm that will handle all the ads and such for the PAC and be paid by the PAC. Or you can take a loan from the PAC to pay your bills. Isn't that the way PACs are run currently?
. Whatever happened to G.W. Bush's Exchange server backups and recovery? That was a priority with a budget if I recall correctly.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...
It truly baffles me to no end when people use the wrongs of the past to somehow justify the wrongs of today.
So I guess we just say F' it and let our elected officials get away with whatever they want. Justice was overrated anyways.
Thank you for the perspective.
Here's what I'm seeing from the outside:
Judgmental. Determining the context of 'knowing' another race because you have a higher or lower percentage of population is really near sighted and conflictual.
FWIW, Hispanic does not reference race, just source location, be it Latin America or Spain.
Did you ever wonder why scientists are always so fascinated with Uranus?
Please tell me you are not using the wrongs of the past to justify the wrongs of today? Come on now.
I'm not sure anybody is saying give Obama a free pass; some of us are just wondering where the FUCK all you constitutional-waving administration critics were during the Bush years... suddenly crawling out of the woodwork after hibernating 8 year I gather.
Sure, maybe Obama hasn't done everything perfect, but I know one thing: throwing Obama under the bus for what clearly started under Bush/Cheney is 100% bullshit.
It gives the impression of really wanting to hide and/or distance one group of politicians from a lot of crap they don't want to own up to, prefer to ignore or forget.
You want to examine and investigate Obama? I say heck yes, I'd welcome that, as long as the previous administration is similarly cross-examined. Bush/Cheney housed goddamn war criminals by any reasonable measure, and no way in hell is there justice if that whole group walks free, after convincing legion of fucktards like yourself to shift the spotlight. This crap didn't appear out of thin air in Jan 2009.
Sorry, that is still not a justifiable defense. Every single elected official volunteers to repair or correct the errors of the past. Period.
Do no stop at just the last administration please. Break away from your favorite news channel and expand the history lesson please. You can easily trace the shift (and growth) of power to the Executive branch back to FDR and The New Deal (and the second New Deal soon after). Those deals created numerous agencies under the Execs control and many, many precedents that each successive administration expanded upon ever since.
History dictates that Obama will declare "executive privilege" or some other nonsense
So he'll be like George Bush? After all, the previous administration used every trick in the book to prevent the public from knowing what the White House was doing such as claiming he needed "unbiased" information which is why he refused to turn over the visitor logs when meeting with oil executives on U.S. energy policy, or claimed that by not opening emails they weren't "read" and so the contents didn't have to be turned over to investigators, the public or even backed up for historical purposes.
And let's not forget Bush (and Vice-President Cheney) avoided every single Congressional request to testify on the failings of his administration to prevent the 9/11 attacks, including refusing to hand over every document requested by the 9/11 Commission except for one page, heavily redacted, which had the title, 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack the U.S.".
So if you're saying Obama will declare "executive privilege" or some other nonsense, we can safely assume he is following the example of his predecessor
Please tell me you are not using the wrongs of the past to justify the wrongs of today? Come on now.
This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian
