In what alternate universe do you think that underpaid retail slaves have access to that kind of capital?
Do you have the courage to ask yourself WHY enterprising citizens cannot successfully start new business?
Your economy certainly doesn't give them any reason to have hope to ever improve on their economic situation.
MY economy? Is this another patching on your lead zeppelin argument that Obama is conservative?
yesterday's hardware does what 99% of end users want.
When the hardware gets good enough, we won't need carriers. That's something to look forward to.
Reminds me, I haven't looked in on Serval lately. Last I checked power consumption was one of the major blockers...
Oil is a nice thing to have, but keeping China and Japan from going to war with each other is far more important because that conflict would fundamentally affect the US and Europe's economies.
Oil shortage would also fundamentally affect the US and Europe's economies by utterly annihilating them, followed by their populations. We're not talking about a bookkeeping problem like the current financial crisis, but an actual total end to almost all production. After all, even France, which runs on nuclear energy, still needs oil to transport goods, including food.
It's fun to live at the end of the era and see the abyss open wide and deep before us, eh? And nothing but windmills and a few failing old nukes to keep our technical civilization, just taking off now, afloat to cross it. And at the same time people like cayenne8 whine when anyone so much as mentions the controls.
Kinda makes one wonder if humanity's not currently encountering the Great Filter.
Government is NOT supposed to be there to try to define or guide my behaviors.
As long as your behaviours have consequences that extend beyond yourself, yes it is.
And as long as you brag about being lazy and irresponsible, it's useless to whine that the big bad government babysits you. Don't want a nanny state? Grow up and prove you don't need one to make you clean up after yourself.
It it NOT wrong to judge someone by their actions or their words.
If you truly believe that, "GameMaster", why don't you tell us your real name, address, and other personally identifying information? Or did you mean it's okay to judge someone else, but not you?
Your right not to be judged goes away when you "stand up and remove all doubt", as the saying goes.
And this is another thing: we aren't talking about being judged. We're talking about being punished. Anonymity lets people air their piece, whether it's a political view, a proposition for a new economic system, or speculation about your mother's sexual activities, without risking their life or livelihood. It's what lets freedom of speech to exist in reality, not just theory, and for everyone, not just those with nothing to lose.
This is, of course, terrible for those who would rather see anyone who disagrees with them made examples of. Authoritarianism is an illness we still can't cure. But anonymity allows us to limit its deadly effect on society.
The founder of bitcoin stopped having a right to be left alone by the media when he chose to design, release, and cultivate a digital currency.
You are the judge of who has what rights on what conditions, now?
You don't get to have your cake and eat it too, there are consequences for actions.
Except for you. You get to publish your views on Slashdot without having to wonder who might hear and take offence. It's these other people who need to live in the Panopticon. Not you. Never you. Always someone else.
Given the influence and wealth it has given them I'm very interested to know who they are. I don't think that's unthical and I think the fact 'whoever they may be' has put effort into remaining anonymous means they must have known people would try to work out who they were when they designed it.
Interesting ethical question, indeed. The thing is, anonymity lets you act without threat of retaliation. That retaliation doesn't need to come in the form of secret police or even a crazy gunman; no, in our society simply having your employment prospects lowered creates an extremely effective chilling effect. And that means that exposing people who wish to remain anonymous is ethical if, and only if, you agree that everyone's actions should be judged by the rich and the powerful, and only independently wealthy people should have any real freedom of action or opinion.
So basically, anonymity would be illegal in a libertarian plutocracy or absolute monarchy and a guaranteed right in a free world, with real countries going somewhere in the middle.
A Bloat-A-Matic? Like this?
"Bloat" is unnecessary code that makes a program run slower. Your example is not bloated, just verbose. Given a suitable wire API, it'll likely run faster than parsing SQL requsts sent as text strings. Also, do note that dynamically building complex expressions is far more convenient when you can treat subtrees as objects. Building strings representing complex logic programmatically quickly becomes a complete mess.
However, if you really want to compile said text strings while serving user requests, do something like
compiled_sql = sql_compile("Select blah blah")
And have sql_compile throw an exception if the expression contains string literals. In other words, remove the ability to use anything but prepared statements and the ability to use string literals in said prepared statements, and SQL injection attacks go away.
Verbose, and ridiculously so. Do you think intentionally making up a convoluted interface refutes anything? Especially since you're applying an API meant for preventing SQL injection attacks to mathematical expressions, where it's presumably impossible to wreak havoc no matter what values of B, C or D you supply.
Well done, the man of straw is dead.
That would've put burrs under saddles.
But Progressivism is about turning us all in to beggars.
Why make government larger on purpose? You keep saying you want less government.
Do you have any grasp of the vast size of the civil service? Probably you do not.
Anyway, you haven't read and understood my reply, and I'll save my time with the rest of yours, since you clearly don't grasp the point of the Ezra Klein comment.