Cuuugi

Do either of these organizations get featured in the Guardian?

How come there's not enough women ditch diggers? or male nurses?

I am tired of the selective outrage in diversity.

This seems identical to Meraki's (https://meraki.cisco.com/) business model, but the enterprise space seems like a lot smarter way to push a subscription model.

Socially? Agreed. Legally it's pretty black and white though. They are choosing one sex over the other.

Which then means you would have to register to buy alcohol. :S

> I think it's funny that people are so upset about some high school students voicing their opinions after experiencing a school shooting.

Did i direct any anger towards any of the students?

I think you misread me. PAC's are circling them this way and that to push messaging on people. That is undeniable. That is child abuse. That is wrong. That is why i am upset. (i'll say that all night, i don't care about karma)

I guess a call to rationalism is down vote worthy?

I disagree. The media spotlight around the Stoneman Douglas high school students should be all you need to know. The fact that they have been elevated to a place they don't really belong (in the national spotlight) is to simply push a narrative. This is child abuse, and wrong.

They want to push legislation to restrict the right to own firearms, when it really hasn't been considered that guns themselves might not be the problem.

What makes a "mass shooter"? The gun just makes them a shooter. To fire indiscriminately clearly shows mental issues.

I don't have a issue with the logic of your statements, however the implementation of them could be rather scary.

Who is to say what a alcohol addiction entails? etc. etc.

Not to mention automatic weapons are essentially already banned.

There's no rational debate to be had, since they only really seem to happen with bodies fresh in our minds.

I don't have the right answer, or claim to, but i do know that making these types of decisions in a crisis, rarely works out.

So, redesigning a barely useable UI, making it harder to use and prioritizes unrelated ads is bad for business?

Wow, TIL

I was just being an idiot on purpose.

"everything in excess is bad" - which you were being downvoted for some reason.

Downvoting a reasonable statement like that seemed stupid to me, so i said a "moderate downvote", what i consider to be a contradiction in terms to illustrate how silly i felt that situation was.

I'm sure it is a moderate downvote?

Maybe they should? Blind faith in brands only causes trouble imo.

You contradicted yourself there. It is legal, and therefore they are not getting out of their legal mandates.

The American tax code is far from perfect, with the scales favoring whoever can afford the best tax attorney. With that said, i think you are grossly oversimplifying the issue. The corporate tax rates (before the recent reforms) were the highest in the developed world. Amazon has every right to negotiate where they move their offices.

A lot of record labels are part owners. That's how they are "getting away with it". Musicians are the only ones getting screwed by spotify.

http://www.swedishwire.com/jobs/680-record-labels-part-owner...

One common feeling (i am from a farming community in Canada) is that tax revenue tends to get siphoned to urban areas.

Politicians focus on bigger voting blocks, while rural communities (in their mind) pay for those promises.

Fair, it depends on the use case(s). Because of the ubiquity of Microsoft, most of the applications i require are Windows based.

I imagine this is true for a lot of businesses as well.

Nothing against, Linux for the desktop but enterprise wide is a big difference.

This seems semi-reasonable over 29000 systems.

The reality is enterprise support for linux systems is the one variable i don't really see discussed here. This is Microsoft's bread and butter for a reason. Organizations prefer an easy upfront cost rather than complex, support intensive solutions.

Within the context of the conversation, it was very specific. You are just being argumentative in my opinion.

Did you read either comment? I was referring to removing the human element from driving (aka. Line of sight concerns)

That's a pretty false equivalency in my opinion. Airplanes can still "operate" without some of the sensors, and have a much higher maintenance standard.

As the other comment suggested, Tesla doesn't have the greatest track record with these sensors, and putting 16.5 ton driving force behind that could have very lethal consequences.

I just wish Tesla was held to a higher standard of scrutiny.

Sensors are absolutely nice to have, but depending on them is a completely different story.

Nazi's came to power because a strong feeling of victimization of a group of Germans.

Most of the atrocities around the world are justified because of a feeling of victimization.

I think both sides of the political spectrum feel victimized by each other, and that scares me.

When GP asks for impartiality, think GP would settle for reasonableness, which i think both sides have lost track of years ago.

All i say, is think inwardly, question your beliefs, and most importantly don't question other peoples motives.

You shouldn't berate someone for essentially asking to back up claims.

Where did i say i didn't read the article? Tl;DR's are for people to not have to read the article, made by people that have read the article.

I suppose I expect more from someone who has been here for almost 9 years.

Subsidies are the antithesis of a "free" market, since the government is manipulating the market.

This seems to be what we are arguing about here, and well there's no two sides to this debate. You are wrong.

It's not a "free" market system when it's using public funds. Simple as that. I'll keep repeating it, until you take a breath.

I don't know why you are so angry or arrogant, but this is the first semi-lucid response you have given.

Wrong, but semi lucid.

If that's NSFW for you, you need a new W

When the business takes public money, it is not truly private.