© 1989 Real World Records
Late at een, drinking the wine,
Or early in a mornin,
The set a combat them between,
To fight it in the dawnin.
"O stay at hame, my noble lord!
O stay at hame, my marrow!
My cruel brother will you betray,
On the dowy houms o Yarrow."
"O fare ye weel, my lady gaye!
O fare ye weel, my Sarah!
For I maun gae, tho I neer return
Frae the dowy banks o Yarrow."
She kissd his cheek, she kaimed his hair,
As she had done before, O;
She belted on his noble brand,
An he's awa to Yarrow.
O he's gane up yon high, high hill -
I wat he gaed wi sorrow -
An in a den spied nine armd men,
I the dowy houms o Yarrow.
"O if ye come to drink the wine,
As ye hae doon before, O?
Or if ye come to wield the brand,
On the bonny banks o Yarrow?"
"I im no come to drink the wine,
As I hae doon before, O,
But I im come to wield the brand,
On the dowy houms o Yarrow."
Four he hurt, an five he slew,
On the dowy houms o Yarrow,
Till that stubborn knight came him behind,
An ran his body thorrow.
"Gae hame, gae hame, good-brother John,
An tell your sister Sarah
To come an lift her noble lord,
Who's sleepin sound on Yarrow."
"Yestreen I dreamd a dolefu dream;
I kend there wad be sorrow;
I dremd I pu'd the heather green,
On the dowy banks o Yarrow."
She gaed up yon high, high hill -
I wat she gaed wi sorrow -
An in a den spy'd nine dead men,
On the dowy houms o Yarrow.
She kissd his cheek, she kaimd his hair,
As oft she did before, O;
She drank the red blood frae him ran,
On the dowy houms o Yarrow.
"O haud your tongue, my douchter dear,
For what needs a' this sorrow?
I'll wed you on a better lord
Than him you lost on Yarrow."
"O haud your tongue, my father dear,
An dinna grieve your Sarah;
A better lord was never born
Than him I lost on Yarrow."
"Tak hame your ousen, take hame your kye,
For they hae bred our sorrow;
I wiss that they had a' gane mad
Whan they cam first to Yarrow."
© 1985 Virgin Records Ltd.
Its from a record of musical poems by the finnish composer, all of great beauty and strong allure.
Barbirolli and Hallé Orchestra did an outstanding job with Sibelius, this entire offering from the 60s is a gem and I believe any casual listener should be able to notice something interesting going on. The Karelia suite, for instance, finally has the proper tempo rubato for the work and truly makes justice to the music... other conductors, and orchestras, perform like a metronome at times. This is just one of the merits of the performance, but I think its very important with this composer.
The problem with Marx was that the surplus value is nothing else but paper exploitation. Real wealth can only be in the consumable product of work that is being send to the market, not in work itself. That's why his labor theory and ideas on surplus value are all wrong.
In a private economy, the final product is, literally, socialized once in the market... because it never remains in the hands of the capitalist. If the capitalist produces cars, he doesn't get to keep hundreds of thousands of cars in his own garage. All the capitalist obtains in terms of capital increases, are symbolic riches on painted paper - in other words, its not just that labor exploitation is not exploitation as such... its that the capitalist is even deceived by his own economic system, so that he becomes willing to share his output freely with others, the economy can work, and goods can be exchanged. This happens every time he receives money, or make believe wealth, in exchange of giving real material wealth to another... probably a worker for some other industry who gets to benefit, as a consumer, from the work of another.
We have to understand that money is useless for absolutely everything, except in aiding in the exchange of goods and services. It has -no value- in and of itself.
But even if it had value, if money in itself were wealth, redistribution and expropriation as solutions to social inequality are also mistaken, because the math just doesn't add up. Pick any super billionaire from the US and divide his/her fortune by the population number. You'll see that if we wanted to take entire fortunes from the rich in order to distribute equally to all the rest, we wouldn't be able to cover household expenses for more than a couple of months, if that. And you sacrifice entire production lines in doing this, so you'd get scarcity and price increases on top of this failure.
There's a good reason why marxist economics have been tried so many times and have always failed. Marxist conclusions are indeed very sound in a logical sense... but their starting point is a problem which is badly defined. The premises which are contained in their arguments are completely wrong in empirical terms.
While China achieved strong economic growth in the post-Mao years by allowing free markets to work, the Communist leadership wants to return the economy to its
China has been saying, specially but not exclusively to its own people, that the growth of past decades is thanks to "socialism with chinese characteristics". As Xi tightens his control on the economy, growth falters, debt turns into crisis and the numbers are increasingly faked, one is tempted to take the opposite stance: that the success of China was because of economic liberalization, and it lasted for as long as those policies were in place.
The comments from the link were authored by Antonio Graceffo and published in mises.org
Disagree. The russian nazi trolls are much more active in "The Gateway Pundit" than Breitbart.
Kanye is a good artist... its a pity he seems so F* in the head. Not that its something new in the entertainment industry... the majority of people in this environment seem to have a psychiatric condition.
I really don't get why some of you are so triggered simply because of my privacy concerns, and the downvoting is so heavy. Maybe a full disclosure is due? What is your own work status with Google and Apple for instance?
Norton knows its stuff, its in the security business since very long, they're very credible, and they point out clearly here that what I'm saying, about phone privacy, is fact.
Very puzzling reaction around this issue, indeed.
Both things, security and privacy, are sides of the same coin. Hacking is nothing more than remote, and unauthorized, manipulation of data in a device you don't own. If you install a keylogger without the user knowing... are we talking about security, privacy, or both?
Lockdown mode helps with keeping the processes isolated, many typical browser features can be used, and are actively used, to fingerprint users. Data, even metadata, is worth more than money these days, with several AI models being developed, and needing training.
There's no way, you say. Yet that kind of targeted ads is precisely what happens, that's what many users are experiencing with their phones, regardless of their microphone permissions. Big tech is being profoundly dishonest about their privacy with users, and don't seem to stick with their own privacy legal terms. But what I'm talking about is the browser version of YouTube. not even the app.
What you say its true, but apps having real problems with lockdown mode are few and far between. Usually cosmetic issues and that's it.
Apple has been dropping the ball on privacy with the latest iOS releases. I thought that 14 had decent privacy. But from 15 onward, YouTube is recommending videos out of your face to face, voice, offline conversations - just like Android does, and I'm pretty selfish with app permissions already. So I enable lockdown mode, not just to harden my phone safety. But also to help a little bit in that regard.
Bottom right seems most fitting.
Voyager can't open posts or display comments with it enabled, it gets stuck. Also, some user settings aren't "remembered". Any chance of a future fix to correct these problems? Thanks, I enjoy the app very much aside from these issues.
