gundy

This shows investment banks are scum: http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/03/11/where-banks...

So Kevin Rose is not a sixty-millionare. I am disappoint.

poor is not the same thing as cheap

Money is simply a manipulation of language backed up by force. The paper coerces sharing (whether fairly or unfairly) of resources (whether labor or physical resources like trees and oil) in a way that does not spontaneously happen without the paper.

A simple example would be without money you barter which is also a manipulation of language expressed through physical items. You need this I need that so we exchange. With money the equation becomes you need something, and you can buy it with money, here is some money, now give me what I want. The intermediary form of this was gold, because people can agree that gold is reliable. We replace that with simple language backed up by force, a dollar. A piece of paper that initially will stand in for gold to establish its value, but eventually will stand in for itself. Eventually we replace this with something like Bitcoin, no coercion simply an agreement in language justified through a market.

Quid pro quo.

Anyone with money would suffice (and pretty much anyone would be willing to provide the service for a song considering there is no risk to them even if they mess up, FB anyone) when floating a stock. Instead banks get to do their retarded song and dance that no one needs or wants and they collect millions for that which enriches their managers for nothing.

BitBucket killed any inclination in me to pay github a penny. And I will stick with them when my team grows because everything is there anyway and the pricing is better. Github tools are really not there to justify the huge sticker price.

Investment banks are scum. They do basically nothing themselves and eat millions in profit. Simply because of their position and nothing else.

It's marketing, friend, nothing personal. Just trying to make some money. You know. It's the 'murican way! No principles, just winning and money.

If the US wants "freedom" on the internet and no internet nationalism (which just means that non-citizens get rights too), it should grant online citizenship to all people of the world. They can all be members of the empire and actually get representation rather than just the tyranny of US foreign policy.

Gasland economy here we come!

In other news psychiatry is bullshit and I would say psychology is not far behind. The whole point of society is that we don't assume people are a certain way until they harm someone. If we no longer do that we're no different from any of the other totalitarian regimes and religions that prescribe their own flawed dogma about what constitutes a flawed person deserving to be punished. Any such civilization should be overthrown because it runs counter to all ideals of the enlightenment.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2013/05/04/p...

That's all that they are good for adding security that would otherwise not exist. Outside of that under a PaaS, I don't see what they add.

They are not really efficient. All they do is add an extra layer of security so you can encapsulate that specific process in a chroot with its own networking stack. Other than that the CPU is still fairshared and the memory still has the same limits as if you ran it without the container. It adds nothing but security.

In other news OPs startup not the future of PaaS but OpenShift, Redhat's open source alternative is.