I recently read a comment in slashdot that had a bizarre structure. The author gave his opinion by telling a story about how he gave that same opinion to a friend of his.
They, Allegedly, walked away.
Without video proof, we can't be sure they didn't strolled, strutted or even rambled away.
I must see too much SF because this seems intuitively too easy.
500m and HD video is an hdpro in a transparent sphere with springs. The landing itself will make it move more than 500m.
I rationally know that sending a 300g mass to the moon isn't trivial, but it does look easy.
Now that I think on it, GoPro (the company) should try shooting a couple thousand of their cameras to the moon just for PR reasons.
Hard to sell.
Imagine a conference room with a salesman, a CEO and a bunch of politicians. Who do you propose they use to check whether the machine is actually capable of giving a negative?
Oh I forgot, a smartphone is the biggest ego-boosting gadget out there.
You're living in the past. They are no longer smartphones, they're just phones. And to boost your ego you'd need something not every seven year old has.
The consensus is that a tablet is expensive enough and big enough to have an excuse to show it at all times.
Just don't post location data or activities if you're engaging in protests... disable location services on your phone. You're giving data to a public database and then crying about privacy... just don't give them information.
How can you be sure that everyone who's participating in that same protest followed your advice?
They don't need the information you post if they already have the information other people post about you.
I repeat: If you don't have arms and legs and you are in a coma, you continue being a human
That's right. You "CONTINUE" being human, if you ever were one.
If you don't have arms nor legs and you're in a coma, but you alse were never born, you're not a human.
Exactly the same as if you have no arms legs no consciousness and are a story character.
Being born is really kind of a big point in the "unBORN" argument, you know?
Sounds like you need some medical attention if you think a company producing a bunch of ones and zeros is equivalent to any of that.
Don't play dumb. He's saying they are equivalent in the "stealing a lot and then giving a little back" and if you don't want to address that argument you have the option of not replying..
The majority of the world will continue to rightly look at Bill Gates as a successful businessman doing charity work with his (for the most part) deserved riches.
We agree in that the majority of the world believes that. We disagree in the part about the deserved riches.
Next time, you could just reduce your argument to "He's not robbing because he deserves the riches he has for these reasons:
Time to move to a more interesting game you can also play in your phone.
Have you ever played go?
(disclaimer: I have nothing to do with the game nor the server creators).
After that I didn't work so hard....
This should be a lesson to you: next time don't work so hard from the beginning.
Exactly. Make it impossible to underpay you; achieve negative productivity.
Don't put up with that shit. Vote with your feet and quit your job. Stop being a bitch.
Or, depending on your region work opportunities and your physical appearance, start being one.
Or bombing the car of the guy who proposed it.
But a union is better.
And if it comes to it, a union can hire the bomb guy.
*: The name of the fighter's mothership shall be left as an exercise for the reader.
And, more importantly, if you remove one drop, is it still a storm?
It would be a big incentive to attraact the best of the best from around the world to the United States. It would go hand-in-hand with smart immigration policies that tried to retain that talent.
The problem is that a fraction of what the immigrant earns is sent out of the country. Thus only part of the benefit to the corporation stays.
Deeper still, the problem is that the corporation's interests aren't aligned with the country, nor has it any pressure to make them so.
Deeper still, the problem is that the corporation is just a product of the economical system. Society cannot specify how to create businesses following a certain set of rules and then claim that the resulting corporation is bad.
A solution would be to have the state control the corporate behaviours that harm the country, however that doesn't work because the state is not the country, just a subset of individuals who are vulnerable to corporation power, which was given by the rules decided by society.
A solution to that would be society removing that power from the corporation, but the corporation was made following rules that society itself imposed, so its the rules that would have to be changed first.
And we don't know what other set of rules works better than the current one, nor whether the new corporate-like entity crerated by them would have even stronger power over the state.