s73v3r

I don't see why it's silly. Just because they're doing the bare minimum doesn't mean they can't do better, especially when they very obviously have the resources to be able to.

We very much can consider whether Amazon is indecent. Whether Amazon is lawful is a decision for the government regulatory boards.

We're not talking about legality, we're talking about deserved merit. And as you yourself have shown, one cannot really independently judge merit, as it always comes down to who is actually judging it. Making the idea of a meritocracy not really feasible.

For a lot of those people, just having free time, let alone free time that you can use to learn a skill is a privilege.

Isn't that because they tend to reinvest most of their revenue back into the company, instead of paying it out?

I think it very much is a reflection of the company, in that it shows they don't take it seriously.

No. There's a huge difference between pushing them and creating a unhealthy environment. And this "survival of the fittest" in grade school bullshit needs to stop.

Also, every student should have the opportunity to participate in the music and arts programs. Art is for everyone, not just the few who were forced by their parents to play from birth.

Anyone who claims that not having the most stressful, rigorous environment around for children is going to lead to a "dumbing down" needs to take a serious look at themselves, and what they want to subject their children to. Maybe CPS should take a look as well.

I'm not even really talking about profits, though. Just the basic amount needed to get by.

Should, but unfortunately one can't always forsee things that come up. If your spouse comes down with cancer, for instance, and you're reliant upon company insurance to pay for treatment, one might be tempted to put their spouse's treatment ahead of those ethics.

"I'm curious, is a TV station liable for content of Syndicated shows, or commercials or all the other content it did not produce but choose to show?"

Well, they chose to show it. So yes.

I doubt security minded folks would be choosing Android, because of the lack of updates.

Well, more that we should give up because it's hard, and the benefits are almost non-existent.

Easy to say now. Much harder to follow through when you're relying on your paycheck to pay your rent or buy you food.

He doesn't seem to be serious, but I don't think one could really call the domain a "joke". It's using a word who's sole connotation is as a racial slur.

And i don't see why there shouldn't be impulsive disagreement, considering how terrible the word is.

Really? Cause that sounds exactly like what he was saying.

Better UX is definitely part of making the world a better place. Maybe the free software people should invest in UX as well.

The permissive license of LLVM means that you can build it into tools. So in that one case, the political difference of the license does lead to a technical difference.

"An office park that has nice walking paths"

The problem is, most don't.

Are you saying that one should be allowed to threaten to kill people in one country from another, and not be held accountable?

Nobody is accusing him of anything other than hosting some poor joke domains. However, his domain was the one that the emails threatening several school districts came from. And while I'm sure they don't think he's the culprit, his server would still have some evidence on it.

Slack may be IRC recreated, but at least for groups/businesses, they've definitely fixed a lot of the pain points of IRC. No arcane signup process, extremely simple sharing of files, perpetual history, etc.

Well remember, the pigeonholed part is in terms of the crap work.

And I would say that in your first several years, you really don't want to be an "expert" in anything, cause you likely haven't had exposure to enough different things.

Same reason people trust the banks current way of doing things.

Keep in mind, this is just for the banks. You're not going to use it, except indirectly as your bank is using it to talk with other banks.

Why? What possible reason would there be to use the old behavior, except for laziness?

Except as has been shown time and again, IT DOES MATTER. Trying to put all of it on just the person, regardless of whether they grew up successful or unsuccessful, is completely ignoring the huge factors at play, most importantly, the factors that we as a society could actually have an impact on.

"Point being, lower socioeconomic households can speak more to their children for free,"

Not if they're working two jobs.

The one who's article we're commenting on right now?

Unfortunately, the people in charge of the social safety nets are going to be listening to only one of these. And it's probably not the science.

Nifty idea, but I imagine it's going to get back to the same problem of putting a touchscreen on Windows to start with: Namely that most of the applications people want to run on Windows (Metro apps excluded) are not optimized for touch. The widgets one would want to use are too small to accurately be clicked on with a finger.