Ah, I see. Well, my intention was to simply add evidence to the claim that the creator of the well known 2048 didn't know about Threes when he created it. There seemed to be a dispute, so I remembered the comment and linked to it.
The webpage for that 2048 references Threes, so even he is supporting a line of direct influence.
the point is that you cannot download an iOS app without encountering its description, so to say that you know about 1024 and not Threes is deeply suspect.
Do you read iOS descriptions of apps you know you're going to download? I sure don't! If I see a friend playing a game that looks good, I download it without reading.
He says he wasn't aware of Threes, I have no reason to doubt him. If I saw a simple game and wanted to make my own version, I wouldn't do in-depth research of the original game either.
He was cloning 1024 which was explicitly a clone of Threes. I was only pointing out there was a chain there.
He was explicitly copying _something_, in a chain of direct borrowings that goes back to Threes. You seem to be taking issue with the pejorative implications of "rip off" that the original article is using to demarcate the difference between an exact clone and the near-but-different copies we're seeing now.
The innovation appears to have advanced enough that some of the 2048 variations are more akin "Doom clones" and "Roguelikes" than they are to "app store clones". But the 2048 apps that have flooded the app store and are mostly direct clones of the web 2048 versions. And they exist in a previously unnamed space between "clone" and "variation".
The article even backs this up by saying that Rubio and Perry may try to use it against Christie. At the very most it argues that Tesla could help decide who isn't president.
Calling someone a criminal degrades their status from someone who doesn't commit crime to someone who does. It degrades them from someone who adds value to someone who takes value.
There is moral judgement involved with calling someone a criminal, and rightfully so. Taking what other people have created by force or extortion degrades society.
Great tips, but it seems like a fairly random selection with basics about positioning and good gotcha tips like <tr> styling. I feel like there could be a whole page dedicated to floats.
> Also, I think recording strangers in public would help curb antisocial behavior.
We have that ability already. In Australia last year there were several cases of racially motivated verbal abuse on public transport being caught on mobile phones. These made the evening news. I wonder if this, and other similar instances around the world, have made anyone think twice before being anti-social.
> A simple basic income implies that you provide everybody with the same minimum income and they cut back on public services etc to the minimum since in theory people can now buy what they want.
I haven't seen the reduction in services implied anywhere. It may, however, be a reality when implemented, but the intention isn't simply to change how government funds are spent on the poor. Generally, the aim is to redistribute wealth from the 'rich'.
The two formulations are similar. If you just print money to give to everybody, you cause inflation, which is a tax on liquid wealth. The wealthy have ways to hedge against inflation, so it's basically a tax on the middle class.
If the original argument proposes wealth distribution it would cause inflation and deflation at the same time. Inflation of lower end goods and services because the poor will have more money, and deflation in the higher end goods and services because the wealthy will have less. i.e., things get more expensive for the poor, and cheaper for the rich. ;)
If we are talking about printing money, it would be similar. The lower end goods and services would get more expensive and the higher end goods and services would stay about the same.
What are these magical ways to hedge against inflation that wealthy have access to and middle class don't? By definition, inflation equates to higher salaries for the middle class.
Commodities, stocks, options, derivatives, and real estate are the most common. But I think they aren't limited to the wealthy per say. The wealthy just know much more about them and have higher percentages of their net worth in these types of things.
You can make money if the market goes up, you can make money if the market goes down, and you can make money if the market doesn't go anywhere.
It's definitely correlated but not 1 to 1. Wealthy people will use leverage though. Effectively their r-value is > 1.0. With middle class it might be around 0.6. The middle class still loses some as their salaries do go up but not as fast. Also, you usually need to quit and go to another job. The wealthy have more control and options.
Fair point. Obviously an easy definition would be one that's fuzzy and increases with distance above the mean... very much like we have now for income tax, but instead for assets held.
Do you realize that the more rich people leave, the fewer rich people there'll be left to plunder?
That, in turn, means that the remaining rich people would have to be taxed even harder to compensate for some of them leaving, which would then motivate even more of them to leave, and there you have a feedback loop that leads to the Basic Income party being over.
I really wish they provide some data like this even if it is anonymized or whatever. It would possibly make it less instantly repugnant if they could actually point to even a handful of cases where not having this data directly lead to a loss of life or similar.
People don't want to be regularly woken by strangers in their building.