I'm currently reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, the first part of the book talks about the methods Hitler and others used to get to power. Trust me, you'd take your statement back if you knew.
SA was in essence a gang of lowlifes that used murder, intimidation and terror to get rid of opponents.
Hitler had amazing abilities to lie to everyone to get to the result he wanted.
That said, one can not fail drawing up parallels with some of the aspects how The Third Reich got to power and how the people running it operated with what's going on in the world today.
Also to be clear I mean the NY times. Nothing wrong with a multi faceted opinion but it's not cool that they don't even point out the evolution of their beliefs. I mean isn't that the point of having an awarded newspaper?
I mean at the end of the day this lack of timely reform is fundamentally making people look for asymmetric ways to entirely avoid problems. Is that the way society should be driven? I think that is an unstable driver of future events --- a society that cannot reform itself in a timely manner, that cannot properly forecast events and repercussions, is a society that is forgetting it's responsibility for balancing itself.
I really do not like this behavior; it is abhorrent of a society that can be a seer. I mean there is the usual belief that we are all equal and deserve equality --- but that cannot happen as long as we inherit citizenship, wealth and networks. It is a nice belief but simply cannot be rendered in any sort of predictable manner.
This creates a situation. Their are private discussions on the ongoing nature of patents --- but I feel that more than anything people are forgetting that as the point of a corporation is it's superhuman predictable nature, that the further antagonization of new corporations will balance itself not with a mutated form of socialism but with an asymmetric alliance of corporations - one which favors unpredictability and an increased rate of change.
Wealth and the rate of innovation are separate --- and that fiction will reveal itself at a much faster rate if proper steps are not taken in a timely manner.
Not really. You're going to want to sell your products in the US anyhow; the New Zealand market is tiny compared to the US market. If you sell your products in the US market, you have to play by the US's patent rules or your products won't be able to be imported (but as Samsung has found out, popular US based companies like Apple can get federal government intervention to veto an import ban on their products, but Samsung can't do the same: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-08/samsung-loses-bid-f...).
What if the real money is in B2B and this is simply going to push the expenditure into a special trade communication zone? Are American companies going to be banned from certain expenditures? Is is it possible that people would create a proxy corporation to leverage the service in different areas?
I'm probably acting like an idiot. But I mean I think this just is creating a recipe for crazy lawyers to try some shit on someones dime.
Explicit self referential media is an interesting memetic spreading tactic.
I used to watch family guy confused as fuck as a kid. What the fuck is up with all these references? If I wanted to be in on the jokes I had to consume more of the same TV media.
Same goes for most pop/rap... in credit referential to others within the same medium. But of course not all music relies on explicit memetic references.
So the question is, why the tactic? I don't know. All I know is that it made me feel ignorant to not consume more mundane TV to feel superior in my ability to get meaningless footnoYes.
Why, so they can't create companies to support their countr's GDP to become independent of your pity aid?
What a monopolistic cunt. Make microsoft quit taxing android phones for a windows license before you act like you have a high ground beyond your 22 hidden patents.
You don't have to agree with everything that a person says or does in order to acknowledge a simple truth. If Gates said the sky is blue, would you (as you have done) call him a 'cunt' for saying so?
Clean water, healthy food, tenable living environment... All these things obviously matter more than internet connectivity. I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise.
If you can get yourself vaccinated against a disease, that's one less thing that can go wrong. You have to be healthy to do things.
The country these people are living in should have hospitals. They should be able to affordably produce antibiotics, malaria nets and everything else.
Antibiotics and most other medical products are unnecesarilly burdened by patents and become prohibitevely expensive unless some rich patron grants them something they could buy at a much cheaper price.
Patents can be a tax on those who are unlucky. I think certain things deserve patents. But the company he represents taxes any linux device as a microsoft device.
I agree people should be healthy. But you know what? Maybe they should be able to make their own fucking choices in their own fucking hospital on their own fucking dime.
He is a cunt for being afraid of competition and supporting autonomy. That is a sign of the weak and those who are unable to deal with truly dynamic problems that come from actual competition.
In all honesty I understand his position. But for him to vocalize it as though he doesn't see the poor billions as potential competitors? Too fucking bad. He can have his own beliefs but fuck spreading a narrative.
The country could potentially have their own corporations that produce a tax basis for hospitals. Those hospitals could have a much lower cost of setup.
You want me to pretend that his short time frame narrative matters? I'd be happy to die today I knew it was part of a meaningful step for others to get beyond the limits they were born into. Sadly socialist demagoguery tend to be run by worse fucks.
Also fuck Greenwald and Snowden; their actions show they have no problem crowning themselves as new Robespierres