Sarcasm and satire have only superficially similar.
The thing with satire is to create incongruity between the package and its contents.
Some dishevelled fellow shows up, claims he's a world-class chef from Syria, and offers to cook you a five-star dinner in exchange for his own meal. He doesn't look especially Syrian. And you can't make out his accent.
So you say, "well, I'm not sure whether to believe you. I made this pate yesterday, and I'd like your opinion. Just one second." Then you duck around the corner, dip a knife into the kitty litter box, smoosh the fresh excavation onto a nice Wheat Thin that Jr. left uneaten on his plate after dropping it on the garage floor (use the dishwasher, people!), which you then—in a flash of inspiration—decorate with two fish eyes from the fish carcass in the fridge that is now mired in cold gelatin and really should have been turned into fish stock three days ago. Oh, what the heck—let's do this right!—so you add a tablespoon slab of the aging fish gelatin.
At this point, it looks like fancy French cooking (looks can be deceiving). It really looks like French cooking when you extend it with the utmost graciousness on your whitest French serving cloth.
"Syrian chef" picks it up, opens his mouth, slides it trustingly under his nostrils, and is about to bite down, then freezes in an eyebrow-raising display of alarm and disgust.
"Don't be angry! I had to make sure. Do you still want to cook dinner? Oh well, better luck next time. "
"Sheesh. I think he called me a racist bastard in some foreign gibberish. Did he really mean it? Surely he could see my predicament and my efficient solution. Hmmm. I suppose it did look a lot like I was serving him shit on a cracker, Gallic style, from his point of view."
Sarcasm is exactly the same thing, except you can't be bothered with the cracker, the fish eyes, the extra slab of fish gelatin, or the white napkin. You just hold up a dry cat turd with your bare fingers and call it a cheesy, because you really wouldn't want to have to eat a fancy dinner prepared by the colour blind, not even if he really was a great chef in his own land.
Actually allow me to correct your correction as MSFT is giving away absolutely nothing as a full version (not the "super duper extra spyware" insider edition) of Windows 10 Requires a legal key from 7 or 8 which currently costs as of this writing between $100-$200 dollars and there are several reports of users trying to go back to Windows 7 after the 30 days to find THEIR KEYS ARE NOW INVALIDATED. I can attest to this being true as I've had to talk to more damned third world MSFT flunkies than I ever cared to thanks to this very issue.
So the REAL cost of Windows 10 is currently between $100- $200 USD, that is the cost of the Windows 7 or 8 key you are giving up by taking this "free OS" and not going for the super duper extra spyware insider edition......sorry but that is the most fucking expensive "free OS" I've ever seen in my life and why we need to kill that "Oh its free you can't complain" bullshit because that is what it is, total bullshit!
The problem is Google and Apple are subject to the 35% rate and there is little they can do about it, other than keeping their profits off-shore. Only lowering the rate to 20% (or maybe 15%, the exact amount is debatable) will motivate them to bring it back here.
Actually, it won't. Canada's corporate tax rate is 15% and it has had no significant effect. Lower the rate to 0% and maybe they will be motivated to bring it back. It's a simple fact that the money goes where it will be taxed the least, end of story. They pay people to make sure their tax rates as low as legally allowed, and the last time I checked, there were already 0% corporate tax jurisdictions, so the only way to guarantee they bring the money back is to offer a negative tax rate.
Hadrian's Wall. Two and a half centuries of use suggests it was working pretty well.
I'm not sure if that was sarcasm because the building of Hadrian's wall marks the beginning of the end of the Roman empire. It was a spiritual turning point for the Romans. When they built the wall they admitted that they could not conquer the world and that they were no longer strong enough to dominate technologically inferior opponents. So they built a wall across an island because they no longer had the will nor the capacity to conquer the rest of the island. It was an admission of what they could no longer do, and it marks the end of the expansion of the empire and the beginning of the fall.
Password entropy rule of thumb: 40 + log2($dollars)
Yes, I know, for some of you it really sucks to have to come up with 70 bits. But, hey, there's always charity.
That's just not true. People are uniformly better off today than they were 35 years ago. What has happened is that tax burdens have shifted somewhat. And if you look at government taxation and spending, you'll find that the only income group that pays substantially more than they receive in government benefits is the top 20% [taxfoundation.org].
I suppose that depends on whether maintaining the society that allows the top 20% to earn their massive incomes should count as a benefit. Studies like this (especially from organizations called "The Tax Foundation" or something similar) are generally run with the intention of showing how the rich are taxed way too much for the benefit of "those lazy poor people" while ignoring the fact that the very same people they spit on the ones who generate all of the wealth that the rich are accumulating. The change that's being going on since the 70s is that corporations have been systematically underpaying their employees for the work they do and transferring that wealth to the owners. I think that in general, Americans overvalue ownership and undervalue productive work and I suspect it's the inevitable end result of the worship of capitalism. It's a pretty good system, but y'all need to stop dry-humping it's leg.
From that I know why I don't support minimum wage increases (it causes unemployment increases and reduces incentive to learn the skills required for just-above-minimum-wage positions, while unfairly targeting low-skill labor markets).
I used to believe the same thing, but apparently it's not as simple as that. For instance, according to the department of labour it's actually myth that increases to the minimum wage cause unemployment. They cite a letter signed by 600 economists (including 7 Nobel Prize winners) that claims that recent research shows that raising the minimum wage doesn't lead to job losses and furthermore it actually tends to reduce unemployment by mildly stimulating the economy.
Somewhere buried in all of this was an opportunity for Netcraft to finally be right about something. Maybe that story has yet to surface, and will appear all in due course in tomorrow's feed bag.
You're getting your annual check up and your GP suddenly launches into an unprovoked tirade:
These people are showing up and spreading their grubby, contagious micro-organisms all over my scattered nose bag of Cosmo and Golf Digest magazines, why is it wrong for me to use their personal medical data however I like?
Tell me, how would you answer your GP? With your jaw hanging open, wondered why the question even needs to be answered?
In a local community, it's not considered good neighbourly etiquette to broadcast to all and sundry every tidbit of information you glean—right down to the license plate numbers—about who you see coming and going on your street during the quiet hours of the day and night.
But then given the same information at the scale of big city strangers passing in the street, suddenly the attitude is "fuck yeah, what's now mine is mine, let's link!" Cause, you know, if they were willing to bump shoulders with you on the crowded sidewalk in the first place, trading a few jacket fibers in the process, that's all the permission you need to go all CSI on the acquired residue.
In fact, your local dry cleaner gives you a 10% discount if you sign over all data collection rights, and what crazy person would even begin to think that's not self-evidently good business sense?
The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.