Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Modding and the Law

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the not-just-for-piracy-anymore dept.

S3D writes "An article at O'Reilly discusses modding as a cultural phenomenon and its relation to the law and authority. The conclusion is that social activists are modders too. They want to change the government into something that supports a productive society. They want institutions to stop hiding facts and to pay attention to science. They want to change corporations, change people's day-to-day behavior, and change our own social relationships."

5 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. So what is modding? by SamSim · · Score: 1, Informative

    Are we talking about moderating a message board? Case mods? Mod chips? Quake mods? This story tells us nothing!

    --
    qntm.org
  2. Re:everything Yay by hackwrench · · Score: 3, Informative

    Corporations exist to produce a useful good. Profits represent the difference in value between instant consumption and investment. However the system has been broken by policies that reinvent those relationships. Instead of the question being asked "is it the most efficient way producing a useful good", and coming to the conclusion that if it is not, the investment needs to be placed elsewhere. http://mises.org/quiz.asp 20. B
    Insider trading is wrongly maligned because who is better to judge the worth of the stock than those responsible for generating results.

    I'm bored, so I'm stopping now.

  3. Re:Like Slashdot Mods by Red+Warrior · · Score: 1, Informative

    Since you explicitly decline to give us any evidence that supports your claims, I see no reason to believe any such evidence exists:

    Or you could pay attention to SCOTUS decisions.
    Review of said decisions here.
    Said latest decision (using google's pdf to html) here.

    The OP was exactly correct, the police have NO duty to protect any specific individual, absent a "special relationship" - which a restraining order is explicitly held not to do.

    Here are some links to some studies, though if you missed the GONZALES case, decided a whole 4 months and 2 days ago (it even made the news AND /., IIRC), I doubt you are really all that interested. Which probably explains why you "still haven't seen anyone citing actual studies":

    http://www.gunsandcrime.org/dgufreq.html
    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/165476.htm
    http://www.gunsandcrime.org/florccw.html
    etc, etc, etc.

    --
    "If, therefore, any be unhappy, let him remember that he is unhappy by reason of himself alone."
    ~Epictetus
  4. Re:Like Slashdot Mods by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 2, Informative
    Since you explicitly decline to give us any evidence that supports your claims, I see no reason to believe any such evidence exists: instead, I will continue to believe that tackling crime is the job of the police.

    Then you are a fool, and since the GPP declined to site evidence, I will do so myself:

    That enough for you?

    --
    "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
    --- Jerry Garcia
  5. Re:Like Slashdot Mods by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Informative

    Minor point. If it wasn't for the GOP votes in the Senate large portions of the Civil rights reforms would not have passed because the Democrats fillibustered (sp) the bills.

    Look up (D) Byrds voting history.