And chat logs couldn't possibly be forged, right? :p
603 karma · joined March 23, 2011
It just doesn't make sense. What does make sense, however, is the US entertainment industry (and governments) wanting to make an example out of them: Here's what happens to naughty little copyright-infringers/freedom-fighters.
Here's what I said:
>> Every government is corrupt, because the very arrangement of government itself leads to corruption.
In this statement, "every government is corrupt" is a description of the state of affairs that the arrangement of government leads to. This does not contradict the idea of a government possibly not being corrupt at its inception - the point was that a government is a flawed institution right from the start.
Bear in mind, a government is a group of people that:
- Wields power over millions of people, and decides everything for them, even though their one-size-fits-all -solutions are practically guaranteed to not fit all.
- Forcefully extracts money from millions of people, and then uses it as they see fit.
- Is not responsible for their actions to anyone. In other words, no matter what they do, they won't suffer any negative consequences. Sure, someone may not get re-elected, but that doesn't really matter, and they'll still enjoy a fat pension (of other people's money) and so on.
In Sweden's case, it's just not your average third-world style corruption like "hand me a bag of money and let's see about that building permit" - it's more about various "constituents" trading in favours/influence/power/positions/money.
Of course, the same kind of corruption applies to the US too. For example, campaign contributions are bribes already.
>> He was also charged with hacking into the computer servers of Logica, a Swedish company that handles tax documents.
"Oh noes! Don't hack our taxes!!"
Logica is a big, bloated IT services company that makes (shitty) custom software for big customers, typically government agencies. They're in Finland too, but originally from England.
What kind of "citation" would you expect? The Swedish government to tell you they're dirty?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not hoping WTF will not succeed. It's just that as someone who's just wasted several years of his life on products that went nowhere, I'm a bit skeptical.
"The Lean Startup" seems like the way to go, but that involves speaking directly to your potential customers, because they're the only ones who know what they really need. Apparently it's really freaking difficult to confirm that you've really got a product-worthy idea on your hands, even if you're talking to potential customers.
Anyone other than his real-life potential customers giving him feedback is.. well, not going to give him the feedback he needs, no matter how well-intentioned he is.
Then there's the issue of someone potentially stealing your idea, etc.
> The HFT trader
You say it like it's a person making trades.
> I've benefited because I can buy/sell at a price close to the quoted exchange price, which didn't use to be the case.
What's a "quoted exchange price" if it's not the price you actually pay?
> Short term investing is "bad" because you're not investing in the future success of the company you're trading on the basis of what you think the market is going to do.
Isn't this what HFT is all about?
Trading on insider information is bad, of course. But if you're on a level playing field, I don't see anything wrong with profiting from something you correctly predicted short-term.
Do you really think any Joe Schmoe off the street could just grab your open source HFT and start making money with it? If not, how does your project benefit anyone?
Are you working in the industry, but not in HFT? Maybe this is project is just practise for getting a job in HFT? I imagine that's where programmers get the fattest paychecks in the world. Only a fraction of what the sociopaths running the show get, of course, but good money nevertheless.
> I just don't agree that HFT is a scourge.
Good thing you're not at all biased.
Why would short term investing be bad, and how long do you think HFT algorithms hold their "investments"?
I hope you're not just trying to blow smoke up my ass here.
You need funding to keep Gitmo going too. I seriously doubt that would be a problem.
As you may well be aware, HFT is a scourge on the world's economy, and it's a game only the biggest and best-connected players benefit from.
As another 'Sperg, I can't help but think you're overreacting. Sure, the article was a tad patronizing at times, but the overall tone was positive. It's not a problem that it was a bit of a "puff piece", as you said, because it'll help people perceive us in a more positive light.
> My diagnosis is not obvious to anyone talking to me unless I were to disclose it
I grew up without a clue about Asperger's or having it. It just wasn't known back then, so I operated under the assumption of being just an ordinary (or "normal") person, and despite some quirks, even pulled off the role.
But immediately upon reading about Asperger's, my sister recognized the characteristics in me. The point is that someone who knows the "symptoms", may well recognize them in you. It may even be obvious.
> I don't want Aspberger's to define me
It doesn't, but it inevitably does to an extent. You probably display most of the characteristics, but at least some of them are under your control. For example, sometimes you'll want to "fit in", so you'll refrain from being as blunt as you'd like to.
I believe that already disqualifies it from being a "complete joke", and the definition of a "powerful mobile computing device" might involve something else besides "being able to install whatever software you want to".
Any discussion with a raging fanboy is dead to begin with. He will reject anything that goes against his rose-tinted view of Google. Reason and logic won't reach him, and that's why it's alright to just call him a fanboy and move on, even though that's pointless too, of course.
In this case, I just wanted to point out the absurdity of calling iOS a "complete joke".
> And that'll do nothing to sway the person you're replying to. If anything it'll just entrench them even more.
That's alright. He's already plenty entrenched. He'll change his views when he has to.
- Somalia has a government, regadless of how "effective" it is, and that alone makes it an invalid comparison.
- The absence of government means the absence of coercion, and that everything would be based on voluntary trade. It does not automatically follow that every place without a government would be a hellish shithole. That soup requires other ingredients besides "no government-controlled police force".
> You seem confused. Arguing against a strawman involves describing an opponent's argument falsely and then attacking it.
- I pointed out that the existence of Government is a problem.
- You implied I was advocating emulating Somalia (originally calling it "governmentless", but now covering your ass by adding "effective").
"Strawman" seems appropriate. Who was the idiot again?
How could you possibly think iOS is a "complete joke".. without being a raging GooGoo fanboy, that is?
It's an arrangement where a small group of people:
- Is in a position to accept bribes in exchange for influence.
- Decides everything for 300 million *individuals*.
- Uses other people's money (or conjures more out of thin air).
- Is not responsible for their actions.
I take it you're referring to the word "retarded"? It was meant to criticize the idea of a "deflationary spiral", not the poster.
> In some future world where no one wants the new gadget the price of the old one will stop falling!
What's the point here? It's not like the old gadget would get sold at the same price for ever and ever.
Oh, and it's not about "affording" anything. If it were, it would be a voluntary transaction, much like buying a Retina MacBook Pro if you can afford one.
Is that the retarded idea that no one will buy anything if prices keep falling? Look no further than computers, cell phones and all manner of electronic gadgets. Their prices keep going down, but everyone keeps buying them.
If you need/want something now, you'll buy it now.
Here's a summary of the article: "The State-Controlled Mainstream Media paints a gloomy picture of a currency that can't be controlled by the State."
EDIT: Perhaps a downvoter might want to point out a flaw in what I said?
Or it could just, you know, stop this whole patent troll madness altogether.
Finland has a VAT of 24%. We also get taxed for income, and there are lots of other hefty taxes too. Strangely enough, this doesn't seem to be enough for our little country to live within its means though. Go figure.
> Even if you give credits to the poor (which means we still track all income) how would you ever take a 'fair' amount of tax from the rich?
What's a "fair tax" on "the rich"? Do you deserve to get raped harder just because you've made a few hundred thousand dollars for yourself?