If a website is responsible for my comments, then I want to be able to sue it if it censors me. So it's responsible for both leaving and removing comments. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. That should make the internet a wonderful place.
Oh hello, this is Google. No problem, I see you give value to the idea that a payed service gives you some control. No problem, I will also make available a paid service where all you get is that warm and fuzzy feeling (in disguise). Hopefully you now feel lots better G
Have you seen garbage trucks ? The latest just have a driver that does not leave the truck. Same thing
Effectively nobody reads science. Everybody gets it through different channels that have a bias. Very few understand it and feel shit for not understanding it. So those that filter it pick and choose and shape the scientific message so that people don't feel inadequate. It will always be like that, learn to live with it. Most people are happy with bread and circuses. The remaining few enjoy the beauty of nature the the quest for understanding. Choose to be among the few.
What if you think about it as creating incentive to help people get the hell out of there creating a much needed service. If you didn't want it, just walk.
There were other such devices such as the tower of the winds. The Greeks did not nessasary discover log the data from the heavens, what they did work out is that the heavens followed mathematical rules and so simple equations could be used to predict the behavior of the heavens and not the whims of the Gods. Hence you could convert the equations to gear mechanisms and off you go
Standard argument from ignorance
... "hey look you don't know what you don't know so we might invent long enough ladders to be able to climb to the next galaxy". Well in fact you are wrong, we are fast advancing to knowing a fair bit or what can be known. I know it may sound familiar. What is well know is the cost of pushing the boundary of knowledge is growing fairly consistently. So in a century we will need half the worlds resources to learn 1% more where as now we need 10% of the worlds knowledge and a century ago we needed .1% of the worlds knowledge.
Ultimately it might not be possible to cross into another galaxy much like it might not be possible to travel back in time to make two planets occupy the same spot with no ill effect ... but you don't know, there are still people working in garages.
$311 Million and they are circling the toilet !! What are they spending it on. I am sure they can rationalise their team and their product range. If it is profitability they want, they should focus in that direction and is find out what made them profitable, which might not be what is bringing in the money. Note Google makes money by selling our analytics but it is their presence on other fronts which makes them a household name.
So as voters do we trust those that represent us or do we trust those whose products we buy to run our country. Should we have government tax the wealthy and spend on social schemes or should we let the wealthy choose where to spend the money ? Its about effectively channeling societies resources.
They would rather remain without knowledge and have science not explore the boundaries. They think this will keep them safe ? All it means is that the agencies that will invest in the time and money to find this knowledge will run the show.
Has Microsoft discovered portable apps ? When I delete it, they are GONE. In fact I can have multiple copies and launched different version. If Microsoft had an elegant sand boxing system such as in mobiles, you are home and hosed.
Why buy a solar system, when the sun is not around to heat the water !!! This makes no sence.
If you have a shop and tens of thousands simply window shop but only a few hundred actually buy something you are a screaming success. The non buyers do not cost you anything. Why is a MOOC a failure if you get thousands that participate and hundreds of thousands that simply audit or don't even go past the first few videos. They are working them out but there is so much content now out there in the interwebs which can help people learn if they want to, it is a screaming success. Don't forget most people, say 95% simply need bread and circuses. The remainder now have access to awesome content whereas they normally wouldn't. It is a WIN WIN WIN scenario.
If we are not willing to pay for our news, they will have to get their paycheck elsewhere The same goes for our music and our movies. Investigative journalism is too expensive. They would love to be able to do that, but readers are swayed by other things rather than credible journalism.
Municipality the world over have a problem. People don't care. They don't see it as a local government but simply as a government department. This is an attempt to get people involved. So the fundamental question should not be "Online voting vs Ballot box" but "Online Votes Vs Ballot box votes".