Slashdot Mirror

I'm actually happy that I'm now forbidden to set foot in the USA again by the DHS, an equally moronic organisation to the TSA.
Happy to spend my vacation dollars somewhere more progressive instead of tacitly supporting the collective stupidity.
I feel sorry for the handful of clear-thinking Americans that hate this shit, but I'm not terribly interested in touring a country full of half-baked dimwits that still think voting Rep or Dem is going to solve their problems.
You people need to start a riot FAST while you still can and clear out some of the deadwood. It's a class war - they want to subject your asses and strip your labour rights, and you seem to just bend over and take it willingly.
What the CATO institute now openly promotes is heart-sickening material: http://counterpunch.com/elich07112011.html.
Fascist America - who would've thunk ?
Are you all really so unaware of how you're shafting yourselves and your children?

see http://www.counterpunch.com/
There are some others about, still trying to maintain these "dissident" connections
Unfortunately too few and far between.
Send them a dollar - do us ALL a favour to establish just a modicum of "balance"

"The entire point of organized science is to let anyone read"

Ya, but Popular Science, is about the popularization of existing research, not the nitty gritty of the research itself. Real science--peer review journals--are even more closed off than commercial magazines. Given science's reputation for free inquiry and openness, it's ironic that scientific publications are the last vestige of closed media in an increasingly open society.

I'm sorry to see this post modded as "0, Troll." There was zero troll intent about it.

A couple others see it my way:

• David Mitchell - Spare me that rubbish about your 'rights'
• Paul Craig Roberts - "Are the Iranian Protests Another US Orchestrated 'Color Revolution'?"

I don't know where these guys fit on the political scale, but I think it's interesting that people are seeing through the free/not-free facade that, amazingly, both the "oppressive" government and the "progressive" protesters seem to agree exists.

...how will you justify killing more than half a million people (according to the Johns Hopkins university)

That's over a million by now. There have been two Johns Hopkins studies published in The Lancet, of which you seem to be referring to the first. There is also a substantial time lag (years) between events and the publication of such studies. The 2004 study referred to deaths up to 2003, and the 2006 one brought the figures up to 2005. That's three years ago now.

The following links are useful for rapidly getting an overview of the issues. The third link points to a more recent report that brings the total (as of 2007) above 1 million excess deaths - that is, deaths that would not have happened without the invasion.

http://www.counterpunch.com/andrew01092006.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/26/europe/EU-GEN-Britain-Iraq-Death-Toll.php
http://www.opinion.co.uk/Newsroom_details.aspx?NewsId=88

So Milosovich was valiant anti-imperialist?
Right.

One theory is that Milosovich was winning his war-crimes trial at the Hague, and was going to call Bill Clinton as a hostile witness in his defense. Mighty convenient that he died of a 'heart attack'. But what do I know, I'm just the jester on the sidelines.

And the Islamists are striking a blow against imperialism? By stoning women to death? Or chanting Islam is a religion of peace!! and shooting a 75 year old nun?

The controlled media picks up on the worst-of-the-worst in the islamic world, to make sure 'we' look down on 'them' as primitive. There are plenty of examples of nasty people in our own midst - who are we to look down on bad-apple islamists shooting a nun, when two American Highschoolers slaughtered 10 buddhist monks in a petty war game/robbery?

NAFTA is the least of Clinton's transgressions: Who Said Clinton Didn't Kill Anybody?

RT(his)FA

You've got to be Chinese?? Right? Perhaps Punjabi or Filippino, but probably Chinese. Why? Absolutely no depth or erudition to your thinking.

You've not read any articles a /., right? Especially not the one just posted -- the article by Paul Craig Roberts?

I mean, there's never been any such thing as a free market economy, don't you have any knowledge whatsoever??? This will be my last post to /. as I've noticed the vast majority of sharp people no longer post, and the remainder are completely pattern-challenged!

In other related news, even when the RIAA collects digital royalties, they then proceed to "lose track" of the artist long enough to avoid paying them.

http://www.counterpunch.com/wilhelms09232006.html

How about Robin Cook, british minister of foreign affairs? The WMD evidence was unconvincing, but up until his resignation I saw the slim possibility that "maybe the high-ups know something that's too secret to tell us." Then he resigned saying:

Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of that term - namely, a credible device capable of being delivered against strategic city targets. It probably does still have biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions. But it has had them since the 1980s when the US sold Saddam the anthrax agents and the then British government built his chemical and munitions factories.

That really put the WMD argument off my list of reasons to invade Iraq. I mean, our intel is so secret we can't even tell the british foreign minister. Really.

You were not only lied to, you let yourself be lied to. It's not that hard to hit news.bbc.co.uk and draw your own conclusions.

Besides, every American knows that Jimmy Carter was the worst President ever.

But, do you every wonder why people think that (11th paragraph).

Yeah, it's OT but the parent was modded up, so what the hell.

Yes

I have a couple of things you can read. Not on the same exact subject but interesting nonetheless
Sense and nonsense about 9.11
Death Downtown

I don't think this would fly under the Constitution. Copyright is not supposed to be content-aware -- for example, you can publish a book full of hoaxes and outright lies and receive copyright protection because the marketplace of ideas is what distinguishes a good idea from a bad idea, not some censor who creates an artificial category.

The use of technological measures or contractual terms to prevent the copying of noncopyrightable material shall be illegal.

A better step might be to move to the German model, where you have the right to make personal-use backup copies of anything and it is in fact illegal to use copy-protection to prevent this. There is a tax on blank recording media which is used to compensate copyright holders for their losses due to such use.

This provides a way to regulate images of pornography and violence without raising First Amendment objections. You can make it and sell it, but you can't prevent it from being copied, even in bulk. This makes it far less profitable.

Since copyright is seen as a form of protection meant to encourage the production of new content, this differential treatment certainly would raise 1st Amendment objections. At least, with a real Supreme Court it would -- not sure about these guys any more.

Remember, Bush doesn't owe Hollywood, let alone Simi Valley, home of the porno industry, any favors.

This is the most hopelessly naive thing I have ever seen anybody write about the pr0n industry. That it is either limited to Simi or that nobody would object to this is ridiculous. Last I looked, the print and internet pr0n industries were scattered all over, with a high concentration in New York. I know of one editor who lives in Florida. Had Dubya been elected legitimately he might be able to push something like your proposeal through (to all our detriments, since such wedges never stop with clear-cut examples like pr0n), after the election fiasco he would be a fool to try it.

Oh, wait, he is a fool. Well, trust me, it won't succeed.

These people believe they can put together a case that Katherine Harris has been playing hide-the-salami with both Jeb and Dubya for years. Do you think Dubya would want to encourage Larry Flynt to put his resources behind this effort? There are many reasons not to open this can of worms.

But the best reason, of course, is that things like this never stop with dat evil ol pr0n. If you think this is such a great idea I respectfully submit that you might find the legal climate in other places more congenial. Canada, for example, has been seizing books left and right for years. Unsurprisingly, not all of them are the gay pr0n being "targeted" by the censors.