Why is civil disobedience acceptable for people but not for corporations?
Who says civil disobedience is acceptable for people? In a civilized society, that is not how we change things.
You're not paying the Uber driver. They dont see that money. Uber collects from the passenger electronically then calculates a commission based on that fare (80% where I am) and pays the driver om sunday the aggregate commissions earned.
Technicality, yes. But in law those are two distinct transactions. Many business models work this way paying on commission only, so why does Uber get the short end of the stick?
And that is the same technicality that taxi drivers have. You are giving money to the company they drive for, not to them. They get paid by the company. Only the tip (which you presumably also give an Uber driver) goes directly to the driver.
There could be a compromise. American in the U.S. here.
How about allowing the legalization of it as a "hobby"? If someone earns less than $2000 (USD) per year, require personal auto-insurance to not only cover it, but to have it as legal since it doesn't really cross into "commercial" territory at such a low level.
I'm all in favor of them doing it as a hobby as long as they don't collect money for it. If they collect money, then they need to abide by the regulations.
Do you really own your house? Or is real owner the bank that you pay every month or the government agency you pay to keep that house supposedly "yours" twice a year?
With today's mortgage interest rates if I could pay cash for a house, I would be a fool to do so. Also, it's always nice to have a company full of lawyers on your insurance policy in case you have a claim and your insurance company decides they don't want to pay. Technically. the government leases me the land that my house is on for 99 years at a stretch. But if I were to sell my house, I don't have to ask the government's or the banks permission, and people will pay me money for it, though some will go to the bank. So if I own it enough to where people will pay me money for it, I guess that is close enough to ownership for me.
your irrelevance than it does about twitter. People with a life, not dottering neckbeards, are twitter's target demographic.
You mean people who only have life if that life is validated by someone else.
I didn't realize the show was supposed to be about geeks. I thought it was ironically portraying the disconnect between the academic pursuit of science and things that happen in the real world.
I've never seen it.
I take it they intended to do "Dilbert in hard-science academia" but were about as effective as liberal artists usually are when they try to portray anything on the physics or engineering side of the fence?
There is no way talking on the phone with hands free is any more distracting than talking with someone sitting in your car. If that is the case than you may as well make it illegal for anyone to talk in a car while driving, this is just stupid.
Of course it is much more distracting to talk hands free than with someone in the car. With someone in the car, you can hear the entire audio range of what they are saying and it is far easier to understand what they are saying. With a voice over a hands free set, you are limited to the frequencies which are passed through by the cell phone carrier. If the person on the other end is also on a cell phone, then you are probably also fighting with a microphone that is not in the proper place for picking up the voice, is not a particularly good microphone anyway, and is also picking up surrounding noise from the other person's environment.
The reason for keeping weapons such as knives out of schools (or anywhere else) is to reduce the chance of fights escalating and becoming deadly.
What has been shown to reduce the chance of "fights escalating and becoming deadly" is training in the use of knives and guns, not bans on their possession. Children and young adults who have had such training have about the same rate of "delinquency" - but the "crimes" they commit are almost never violent. (They also know what they're dealing with and what to do about it if someone DOES start misusing a knife or gun.) Kids who learn about guns and knives only from entertainment media (where blood and agony are not shown) and other kids are the ones who commit the violence.
On the other side of the world, I did not need any sign or rule to know that if I sneaked my dad's shotgun into school, I'd be facing certain suspension.
On this side of the world young adults used to bring guns to school when they were going to the range or hunting after school (or had been hunting at dawn before school) with no perceptible problems - up to the latter half of the 20th century. Interestingly, that's when the child-rearing fads started "protecting them" from information about weapons.
Context of the story aside, my worst experiences with taxis have all been in Las Vegas. Being being asshats with lawyer ties to politicians, they are angry at their customers just for being customers. It has gotten to the point where I'd rather pay for a private car or take a hotel shuttle over a taxi any time we visit Las Vegas. I've been yelled at, my wife's bags tossed to the ground and just made really uncomfortable when dealing with them.
In my experience, the taxis were fine, it was the customers in the taxi stand trying to trick you into sharing a ride for free (for them) that bothered me.
"You show me an American who can keep his mouth shut and I'll eat him." -- Newspaperman from Frank Capra's _Meet_John_Doe_