It's an indication of economic retraction.

Traditional Saudi Arabian architecture is based around keeping things cool. Like the high walls in this building complex keep everything in the shade, and retain the coolness from the night as much as possible (because hot air rises, the cool air stays in the building). At the same time, it still allows natural light which overall makes a very comfortable effect.

Having a line allows you to enforce hierarchy. The people at one side will never want to go to the other side, that's where the lower class people are.

We'll sneak some probes in to do real exploring.

...naming it after an irate puppy killer.

They should try something incremental rather than target proverbial moon-shots first. That way the investments are less risky. Their egos seem to want showy shit ASAP, no wonder they get along with the tinted person.

People who tell the prince things he doesn't want to hear... well, let's just say their life expectancy isn't particularly long.

It's a GNU-flavored version of those MS extensions, originally they added a subset of what MS does in order to let gcc use data structures in MS's headers and have somewhat source compatible builds (I think this was roughly around the time Cygwin popped up, but I'm not sure).

A fair number of professional teams enabled those extensions for non-Windows code because they like some of the tricks available with the extensions and use it in their proprietary or open source code. It's a trend that has finally spread to the Linux kernel. I think this was really only possible as some of the kernel grognards retired or were otherwise not around to put up a fight and generally maintain the inertia force on LKML. Torvalds himself isn't quite as grumpy as people think and is generally pretty pragmatic and can be influenced by consensus and reasonable arguments.

Jesus sees you.

I never suggested a proportional pay system. But the upper limit is paying someone based on what they produce, anything less than that makes it possible to operate a business, paying anything more and it's not likely the role can be justified.

The labor market is not a free market. There is significant manipulation on three sides of it; from unions, from business, and from government regulation. For the most part, whatever mechanism you imagine creates a "market value" for your labor is just that, mostly just your imagination. There is practically no economic incentive to drive wages up or down by a $1 when labor itself is not a real commodity. Exchanging one worker for another is certainly the dream for some, but it's a dream that even the most aggressive capitalists don't practice. They will pay one person more than another for the same advertised role. For example, it happens to such a degree that government regulations were created to deal with fair employment practices and discrimination. Other discretion and prejudice that is not protected by law is fair game of course. And the only reason for this is that labor is not treated as a commodity by either labor or management.

Life as a service is kind of what some people have as a plan for you. But I get your point, and I would again point that you have the concept of a market value confused as a zero-sum system of exchanges. The very benefits that capitalism espouse is that production and consumption do not have to balance out and shouldn't for some very important macroeconomic reasons.

Holistically, the cab company produces a service of a value. The most important aspect of that service is the labor the cab driver performs, but the labor is not the entirety of a cab company. Setting that quibble aside, let's assume you mean paying the cab company a percentage of your salary.

You as a customer are willing to pay some amount for the cab service. Traditionally we'd have a fixed price that everyone pays for cab fare, typically regulated by cities but almost always a formulaic charge of an initial fare + distance charge. Everyone pays the same amount because it would normally have been too difficult to work out each patron's income at the point of service.

If you were using a "surge pricing" ride-share app, that is attempting to seek a real-time demand pricing, then individuals get to decide on a price and each person can be presented different prices at different times. Through relatively straight forward statistical analysis on the backend, the supply-demand curve can be optimized in the businesses favor. And you will be paying near the maximum you are willing to pay, which is somewhat correlated to your own personal financial situation.

This just leaves more product for other countries that run by morons, probably reducing prices worldwide. This is why much of Africa had 5G wireless before the US did.

-embrace-extend-extinguish

The fix https://slashdot.org/comments....

You don't just take away privacy or decent wages or job security or healthcare all at once. You got to boil that frog.

Here in America it took us 65 years. This whole mess we're in started when Barry Goldwater lost. The corporate wing of the Republican party formed in alliance with the racists and the religious extremists. We were explicitly warned about it but we ignored the warnings.

Like back when the deregulated comms sector over-built capacity.

It was supposed to say keep workers in line.

So the underlining premise is that we can't just explore for the sake of exploring because nobody's going to pay for it.

We have to colonize just like we did hundreds of years ago because in order to get the kings, well the CEOs now but they're basically the same thing, to fund the whole thing we need to offer them the possibility of a reward. A payoff for them.

I suppose we could fundamentally reorganize our entire civilization so that we did not need the blessings of kings to do cool stuff but I think we are nowheres near ready for that.