Slashdot Mirror

...that anyone hasn't mentioned http://www.sg1archive.com/bios/at.shtmlUSAF Lt. Col. Samantha Carter, Ph. D.

Alias does have some reruns mixed in witht he new episodes, but seems to be pre-empted a lot for scheduling conflicts.

I don't have details on what they were showing on the off weeks, but for example check here for the release schedule for Stargate SG1 season 8, where 20 episodes took about 39 weeks to broadcast.

From Stargate SG1 of course!

You can see a schedule of upcoming episodes on this calendar. New episodes start up on January 21st.

Season 9 of SG-1 and Season 2 of Atlantis don't begin until next Summer.

And discourse with you is like listening to a recording.

I've already read your statements that PATRIOT Act is in effect. I've read your statements that it was enacted by Congress and signed by the sitting President. I've heard all that. Several times. Yet you feel that if you just say it enough, I and others will realize that it makes everything OK, and PATRIOT is my friend, and if my congressmen voted for it it must be OK...

It doesn't make the bill a good bill. It doesn't make it constitutional. What makes a bill constitutional is for the bill to be compliant with the provisions of the Constitution and its amendments. The way that gets tested is that a Federal court hears a case in which a specific section of the law in question is challenged, and then hands down a decision. This decision can be appealed, by either side, all the way up to the SCOTUS, who can then decide whether or not to hear the appeal. Their decision is final, unless they choose to revisit it. The SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter of Constitutionality in the USA, and they have not handed down a SINGLE decision re: PATRIOT Act that I've been able to find.

IOW, krimka, your assertion that PATRIOT has been approved by the SCOTUS will require additional evidence. Repeating the assertion isn't evidence.

Would you like to know why I object to PATRIOT Act? Here's a sample: The Patriot Act defines domestic terrorism as conduct that violates state or federal law and is dangerous to human life.

WHAT?

By that definition, you could just as easily say that driving in the rain without your headlights is domestic terrorism. Is that a reasonable interpretation? Of course not. But consider this. The FBI, at the bidding of the MPAA, used the PATRIOT Act to obtain financial records to be used in the prosecution of a website administrator. The charges? That he was distributing old episodes of Stargate SG-1. Now, I don't care HOW much you hate Stargate - that's not terrorism. That's abuse of powers.

Lastly, let's settle this thing about "rude". Every time you question whether someone who opposes PATRIOT Act is truly an American, suggest that they are on the side of the terrorists (whichever terrorists we're pissed about this year), or suggest that their only motivation behind opposition to PATRIOT Act is to garner some sort of "points" in some game, you insult that person most poisonously. Dissenting discourse is about as American as it can get, and the unAmerican way is to try to suppress discourse from the opposition. In the face of that, my telling you NOT to be "stupid" is a fart in a hurricane. I'll retract my suggestion that you have the potential to be stupid the moment you retract your assertion, in every commment you've made attached to this article, that opposition to PATRIOT Act is unAmerican.

Every time you repeat the calumny about "jeopardizing our safety so they can score some political points" and "weak on security", you echo the words of another manipulator of sheep. Since you seem to think that repetition==argument, I'll repeat those words for you again. See if they sound familiar.

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." -Hermann Goering, Nuremburg, 1947

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always
be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is
tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any
country." -Hermann Goering, Nuremburg, 1947

You've been brainwashed, krimka. Brainwashed. Nobody wants terrorism here. Neither do we want our Constitutionally-mandated civil rights abrogated.

FACT: PATRIOT Act has been abused. More than once. More than twice.

If you could say that PATRIOT Act could and would ONLY be used to investigate terrorists, that would be a different story. But you can't say that: firstly, because we've already seen that it isn't true; secondly, because the more power you give to law enforcement personnel, the more those individual persons will abuse it - it's just too easy to say, "uh, yeah, it's a terrorism investigation, sure"; and thirdly, because you won't know that they're terrorists until AFTER you've violated their constitutional rights.

The fact that a group of assholes have committed horrible crimes against Americans, in the name of Islam or whatever, does not justify the abrogation of the Constitutional rights of Americans, and *I* resent your implicit belittling of the sacrifices of those thousands (millions?) of Americans who have *knowingly* and *willingly* fought and died to protect those rights.

http://sg1archive.com/nightmare.shtml

(I am the wife of the target of the investigation, aka "HurricaneMB" in the attached comments.)

The story was posted on slashdot a while back too, but I don't have the link at the moment. The slashdot comments critized our story for being vague. Well, duh, there's an ongoing criminal investigation. What were we supposed to do, hand the feds their case on a silver platter? Tons of reporters called asking for more details, but our laywer, who was kinda pissed that we posted anything at all on the internet, said not to talk to them. When this is all over (hopefully sometime next year), we will tell our story in much more detail.

And yes, it did influence our vote for President.

So, you're saying that the intent will always match the usage? It never will be (and never has been) used for purposes other than combating terrorism? You're new on this world, aren't you?

Ever heard of a guy named J. Edgar Hoover? Richard Nixon? You think if you come home someday and find a bug on your phone you're going to be able to say into it, "Whoa, dude, I'm a musician, not a terrorist!" and they'll immediately come remove the bug?

Only terrorism, huh? How about this? How about this? Or this?

Dude, face facts. It doesn't matter what the people who voted for the PATRIOT act intended, what matters is how it's used - or, in reality, abused. Fact is, it's being used EXACTLY the way Ashcroft and cronies intended - for non-terror-related investigations.

I believe it was used on The Stargate SG1 Information Arvhice, but the problem was...the guy was under investigation for a few years. He was offered 20MB versions of the show (low quality, but it was still the show) and he got C&D'd from MGM and the MPAA. He took down the links, but from what I'm told he was still putting them up under a predictable naming scheme.

Sure, it was wrong to use the Patriot act (or maybe it was the DMCA), but he was going to get caught anyway.

Stargate SG-1 just had an episode last Friday ("Avatar") using some in-game footage from an upcoming SG-1 game. It wasn't a particularly effective use of the footage, though - it seemed more like it was wedged in there by marketing than by the writers.

Molyneux and friends are also working on a game called "The Movies" which could ostensibly be used to produce amateur renditions of movies or shows.

And, of course, who can forget the use of the Halo engine in Red vs Blue, the second season of which was just released on a hilarious DVD.

5) Copyright infringement is a civil crime, not a criminal one. The gvt has no case in trying someone under criminal law for copyright infringement.

Actually, under 17 USC 506 (enacted in 1976, effective in 1978, so predates P2P and even the Betamax), there's a criminal component to the Copyright Act. Both a civil complaint and criminal charges can be brought. Just ask Arcady.

Bingo!! Thank you for answering your question for me. This is the exact issue I have a problem with. Without oversight, a critical check/balance between the judicial and executive branches vanishes. If a fed wants to look at my financial, video rental ...etc. records, he had damn well better have a warrant - sworn and signed. Now all he has to say is "I think bckrispi represents an immediate terrorist threat (or, as a more insidious example, engaged in copyright infringement); let me see all his financial records from the last year.

Violating the constitution? Eroding rights?? I think "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" speaks for itself. My question to you and your dinner buddy is, how does this new power not violate the constitution and erode our rights!!!!

I suspect your beef is with Section 214 of PATRIOT, which adapt the rules for obtaining "pen register" and "trap and trace" wiretaps (NEITHER of which reveal the content of a conversation--only where the calls come from, and where they go).

You suspect incorrectly, my beef was with what you stated above.

Without breaking copyright law? Are they really going to license content from every single site? Or will the Feds bust them like Adam McGaughey?

Gah, disregard that, should have scrolled down further before posting. Here is what he was talking about.

Did anyone notice this bit on the SG-1 Archives forum post about this:

Posted: Mar 30 2004, 11:46 PM

Surely this is interesting and all, but VERY outdated. I would think there is quite likely some more current information available. What has happened in the last four months?

That sounds like a season 5 episode. The new ones (second half of season 6) start up again on the scifi channel in January I think.

You can get a good summary of the episodes and show news here:
http://www.sg1archive.com
They also have links and info about buying the DVDs.

That gives me hope. What would your average MetaFilistine do?

[Nerd alert]

Episode 18, Season 1, Tin Man.
Original Air Date: February 13, 1998
O'Neill and the SG-1 team arrive on P3X-989, only to be zapped by an electrical trap that renders them unconscious. When they awake, they find themselves in an underground lab with Harlan, a strange but apparently peaceful native of P3X-989 who claims to be 11,000 years old. Harlan, the planet's last survivor, who has lived for 11,000 years in a synthetic (that is, "robot") body, has also created robot duplicates of SG-1. Hilarity ensues.

"Ladies and gentlemen, this is your colonel speaking. Welcome to P3X-niner-eight-niner where it's a balmy... room temperature." - Col. Jack O'Neill

How embarrassing for me.

don't forget SG1 Archive

WHY, wouldn't the Federation start making projectile weapons for fighting the Borg? Dumbasses...

Catch all the episodes you've missed:
http://www.sg1archive.com/

(of course, now I've slashdotted the site, but I've already downloaded all the episodes...)

One thing that interests me, however, is that KaZaA is much more than audio file sharing. You can download audio, video, software, images and documents, and only one of those categories applies to the RIAA. I suppose it only takes one category, but it's interesting that no other companies or industry representives have become involved (yet, to my knowledge). I wouldn't be too amazed if the MPAA joined the fray, not to mention numerous software companies.

The thing is...how long can this go on for? Someone sets up a filesharing network. The RIAA sues them, bringing their vast financial resources to bear, which means that any other resources they require can be bought. They close-mindedly bring about the destruction or complete alteration of the network, not taking into account many technicalities like the way that Napster was demonstrated to actually boost CD sales, and that the server owners should not be held responsible for the traffic on their network, just as ISPs cannot. But in this time, another network has popped up in its place. In fact, several networks.

How long can this continue? Surely the RIAA must realise that it is a futile proposition (at present) to attempt to take down every filesharing network that may allow access to copyrighted material? I suppose that's why they are attempting to pass more and more fascist laws, and are encouraging other countries to do the same, in order to maintain their somewhat archaically-based real-world manopoly. Surely there must be an easier way for record companies etc to protect their copyrights, within reason, but to allow filesharing like this within reason as well (and I'm not specifically thinking of subscription). It seems that the RIAA, MPAA et al, rather than go with the flow and try new avenues of profit on the net, are attempting to stand firm in a present system that is rapidly becoming a part of the past. I am reminded of the SG-1 Archive, which was recently featured in Showtime's magazine (since Showtime produces Stargate SG-1), where the site was apparently hailed as a source of information on the series, and yet a couple of weeks later the webmaster received a CAD letter from the MPAA and was forced to remove the episodes available for download. This would not be a problem, legally speaking, if Showtime had objected to the site; but they hadn't. They had praised it. Apparently the MPAA is simply doing the rounds, attempting to scare everyone into submission, and sue those who are brazen enough to resist, despite the wishes of the people producing the actual material (who the Stargate SG-1 copyrights actually belong to I am not entirely certain, but I believe it is MGM/Showtime).

Having said that, I fearlessly and without disclaimer (partly because slashdot thinks my IP is a 203.97 subnet, which it's not) acknowledge that all the software and mp3s on my computer are pirated, and that I feel little remorse. Being what I hope is a morally upright person, this disturbs me somewhat, but when I see the sort of things that Microsoft, the RIAA, the MPAA etc do, and the tactics they resort to, I seem to feel a lot better. As a writer, I put a certain value on intellectual property, and I also accept that people will copy and distribute my work illegally. This doesn't bug me particularly, partly because I'd be a hypocrite if it did, and partly because people will still buy my work, despite those who pirate it. When I look at how bloated with money MS, RIAA etc are, I hardly feel sympathic.

disclaimer My ideas and arguments are subject to minor alteration depending on circumstances, and are probably slightly bigoted and not as balanced as those that I normally produce. Taken completely objectively, you may well be able to tear holes in them. If you feel the inclination to do this I would be appreciative, as I am still formulating my own opinions in this matter; however, I ask that you don't flame simply for the sake of flaming...it doesn't tend to be conducive to constructive conversation.

http://www.scifiguide.net/stargate/s4/401.html
Stargate SG-1 Episode "Small Victories" where they meet the Replicators, an evil group of robots that destroy entire worlds and civilizations, eating the raw materials to replicate, while absorbing the technology and using the shells of the conquered ships to find more civilizations and more advanced technology to absorb. Kind of like the Borg, but even more sinister in that they cannot be corrupted or reasoned with.

You can watch a DivX of the episode at SG1Archive http://www.sg1archive.com between season three final episode and season four 1st episode.

It's gone into differant director's hands over the past few seasons, so it's also interesting to see the differances between the seasons. I like the way It's going.

However, I've heard that this may be their last season! It will be very sad if that's the case. I would love to see it live on, but if not, let's hope the ending is good.