Money is basically created out of nothing.
The emphasis you putting on being crushed by debt is in discord with this other statement that you made. Allocation of resources - including the time of scientists and the hundreds of thousands of acres in the Midwest - can cause to new resources to be made available or it can backfire. I have to disagree with the general tone of your thoughts since it seems like you may believe that all of the major allocations of resources over the past decade or two in America has somehow backfired and gone up in a puff of smoke... which is not the case.
I'm not sure I see the point in paying any significant amount of money for eBook cover art, but to each his own. The average cover art for an eBook is going to be shown Icon Size on an eReader menu. No?
I agree editing is key and being able to pay editors frees an author to do other things. But wouldn't high editor fees equate to the equivalent of the "unpolished/lousy prototype" type project that this thread is saying shouldn't go through KS anyway?
My KS pet peeve is seeing typographic errors in project descriptions. What chance is there that the end product will be polished if the requester doesn't have sense to polish the request for money that they are putting out there?
An extra 3GB of data sent to a casual users ought to earn Facebook some kickbacks from cellphone providers!
So maybe that's their new business model? Deliver content, earn kickbacks? This actually seems much more lucrative than being an advertizing company since cellular phone companies have been clamping down on Monthly Allowances for the past few years.
I don't get what the
Fucking puerile moron.
Boy, that escalated quickly!
Whatever... I learned a new word today! puerile.png FTW.
Are you accusing these companies of racist hiring practices?
No. Speaking generally.
General demographics of the company's employees is not evidence.
Correct. But Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and every other big company with complicated organizational structures where hiring decisions aren't centralized should be aware that the people they trust to make hiring decision sometimes have selfish motivations behind their decisions. I don't think you'd disagree with the generalized statement that "racist people exist" and extrapolating that to "racist people who make hiring decisions exist" isn't too much of a leap of faith. I'm not saying Google, Facebook, or Yahoo employ racists who make hiring decisions. I'm saying they ought to have some checks and balances in place to guard against allowing illegal practices from occurring within their organizations.
My post was a reply to the question "Why should company's care about this at all?" because I think there are very real reasons why companies should care even if they have no real reason to suspect their hiring managers are acting unlawfully.
Why would Google/Facebook/Yahoo or any other company be paying attention to the race, gender or religion when hiring?
Company's aren't supposed to be racist. People are occasionally racist. People do hiring. Hiring is liable to be racist if the people doing the hiring are racist. Company's have a responsibility to monitor the people doing the hiring to minimize racism within that process. If a company does pass over a better qualified minority because of racism (or sexism, for that matter) that is a problem for the company.
The usual villain here is Walmart. They have been abusing suppliers long before Amazon got in the act.
Point of consideration that Walmart bullies around smaller suppliers while Amazon is taking a stand against one of the major publishers with Hachette and Warner Bros which is operated by Time Warner who is currently seeking Anti-Trust approval to merge with Comcast.
If anything, Amazon's ability to stand up to Big Media seems to be in the best interest of consumers. Big Media is where the evil monopolies seem to be. Amazon's power over online sales relies on convenience, their customer supplied rating/feedback system, and their pricing policies. Amazon wants to charge small for high quality because cheap crap will be rated as such on Amazon and nobody will buy it. Meanwhile Walmart wants to charge small for low quality because who cares about customers and suppliers if they can earn 20% of half a Trillion bucks each year (http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/wmt/financials).