No, but Google is where people go if they want to find something, and of course that also means that this is where people go for news. Unless news outlets agree to dump Google people will find what they're looking for and not bother looking for the one news outlet that decided to not cave in.
Well, one asshole keeping a bunch of assholes busy... you know the saying, nobody on this planet is useless, and behold, even Kimmie has a use.
Could I imagine Thatcher instead? Yes, as a corpse.
As a corpse, Thatcher is actually not that bad a mental image. I mean, sure, she's till hideous, but at least she's dead.
I would tread lightly on the whole Ghostbusters blunder if I tried to argue FOR the SJW side. Remind me, who was it again that labeled (or "libeled" rather) everyone who dared to not think this turd is going to be Oscar material a misogynist or worse? Just for disagreeing.
There were very valid, well worded and well argued points that were brought against this movie, with Jones' portrait of the black ghetto mama from da hood as a racist stereotype being not even the worst offense against good taste this movie had to offer, which prompted the director (no less) to go into full rant mode on how people who dare to disagree with his "vision" of the movie to be misogynist bastards.
So if you want to choose a topic to portrait SJWs in a good light, anything surrounding the Ghostbusters 2016 movie is probably not the best start.
Reasonable or not reasonable doesn't even enter the equation, Google got them by the balls. You hand out your snippets for free or nobody will see your page.
What's more sad: There were some local news aggregators in Germany, which couldn't afford the license fees and thus closed shop when the law went into effect. And now we are left with even less news aggregators which have even more market power.
We're not talking about delisting a continent, only its media outlets. I can't think of anything more devastating.
What you are claiming is that the latter is necessary, but the former is virtually impossible.
I'm not claiming anything. I just asked how a worker suffers if another worker gets paid the same as he does.
It was an honest question, and I was hoping for an honest answer, which I still have not gotten.
Do you not realize, for some reason, that Slashdot is a social media site? And what, precisely, is it that you think makes google+, linkedin, facebook, twitter, or more or less most of the major social media sites..."childish?"
Well, on slashdot, every thing is pseudonymous (at least from me). It doesn't track any of my meatspace connections. There are no pictures. While my posts are the content is are being sold, (very Web 2.0), there's no real profile on me that can be crossapplied, beyond the ads on
And childish isn't the proper term. But it can certainly be stupid.
So the question might be reversed, should everyone with the same job description be paid exactly the same, regardless of work output or experience?
This is a good question. All people inflate their own sense of worth. Workers who claim to work 80 hours a week are often making very different choices about how to manage their time as someone who claims to work 40. It's one half of the Dunning-Kruger effect (the other half being that people of high capability often underestimate the difficulty of what they do).
Now I'm not saying that you're exaggerating the amount of work you did in comparison to others (especially those tricksy women, amirite?), but it would be consistent with what we know about human nature and the actual data from the workplace of people who claim to work long hours. Studies have shown that the more hours people claim to work over 55, the more they're exaggerating how many hours they actually work. People who claim to work 75-80 hours a week are usually overestimating by at least 20 hours.
Competence is a complicated thing masquerading as a simple thing. No, people who have the same job title as you shouldn't necessarily make the same amount of money. Your pay is based on performance reviews, training, proven competence and a whole slew of other inputs. The problem is, a lot of those so-called metrics have a built-in bias. And in a salaried workforce, those biases can really run rampant. That's why in countries with healthier, more dynamic economies, you will see pay based on seemingly arbitrary measures like job title and seniority. This was an innovation of the labor movement and led to the most productive workforces in the world.
I have no doubt that you're a competent, hard-working guy. That's my built-in bias because I like you, Ol Olsoc. A lot of times, we find agreement around here. We have things in common. If I were overseeing a performance review of you, I'd probably be predisposed to rate you highly. I'd certainly be predisposed to rate you more highly than the woman who's been a bitch to me every since I made that joke about the one-eared elephant at Miller's retirement party.
Now, get the picture?
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -- William E. Davidsen