it's hard to argue that the SC is republican, mostly because they take so many sides of seemingly identical issues. but it's actually not either one - depending on the specific jurisprudential issues at stake in each case, the justices may decide seemingly contradictory things.
so you can put them on record as supporting gay marriage, abortion, secret courts, against gay marriage, anti-abortion, pro-federalism, anti-federalism, etc. it all depends on what case the litigators bring to the Court. if i argue a particular set of issues to the Court, they may decide that my argument is crappy and rule in favor of my opponent, solely because i built a weak case. if i argue a different set of issues that differ only slightly from the previous case, the Court may rule for me.
so what looks like inconsistency is actually the much-vaunted "nuance" that kerry would bring to the white house. whether you think nuance is a good thing for the executive branch, too, is one of ideology.
but what if the GOP knew that someone would blame the democrats for trying to frame the republicans for something like this, and paid some anarchist (irony abounds) to steal the information?
you underestimate the man. do you not think that he knows what is in his own political self-interest? he's got a safe seat in AZ and the media love him to death, so it's not like he's really taking any risks by speaking against his own party establishment and reaching across the aisle.
and there's a reason mccain is in the republican party: he thinks it's the best vehicle for his policies/career. if you didn't think that was true about him before, you should rethink your idealism.
what if someone in the bush family, say, barbara (the younger), came out of the closet, denounced 41 and 43, and announced candidacy for the green party nomination? would you vote for her then because of her ideas, or would you still hate her because of her family?
i'm sorry if you think it's a foolish example, but i judge people by the content of their ideas and their character, not their lineage. that's what the Civil Rights movement in the 1960's was all about.
when has someone posted *your* personal data wherever, as often as possible? aren't you subjecting them to an extra level of personal exposure, since they too live under USA PATRIOT and the DMCA?
and how does the DMCA affect your privacy, anyway?
makes sense. if thoughts are describable as the operation of brain chemistry, then changes in the operations of brain chemistry would imply a change in thought patterns, and vice versa.
dude, turn them in now. only when the FTC knocks on their door will they actually start listening to you. why do you think whistle-blowers have to talk to the Feds in the first place? because their companies don't listen to them.
My vote would be for a hydrogen-fuel-cell contest. DARPA should offer a humongous prize to the winner of a contest to retrofit an existing retail-market car to use hydrogen fuel cells, and achieve some amount of efficiency.
use randomly (or almost-randomly) chosen sites as seed sites. use the almost limitless blog or forum sites, or even usenet, to communicate. sure, this makes for long handshake times between peers, but it certainly reduces their vulnerability to DDoS.
this would allow one to find seed sites using google (or google-cache) and find the peers on such a site.
there are plenty of problems with this, but ideas never hurt.
i was modifying the adage for rhetorical value.:) it is supposed to be "putting" as in "he was putting the tray on the counter when a bat bit him on the ear."
that particular cliche is fun, though, because it has so many ways to screw with it to get people to give you food:
- the proof of the tasting is pudding
- the pudding is tasty
- the proof is tasting pudding
- etc.
i know this is slashdot and our standards of evidence/logic are pretty low, but....
there is nothing approaching a persuasive argument here. your first sentence uses an irrelevant conclusion and an ad hominem attack on White Christian Americans and US president bush, and the last three sentences are a straw man.
if you'd care to reformulate your response, i promise to give you a cohesive answer.
2) the presence in guantanamo bay of lots of known al qaeda operatives who have detailed their planning procedures for the september 11 attacks is a pretty good clue.
3) bin laden had already established a pattern of conduct with the USS cole and khobar towers bombings that made him particularly interesting to international terrorism experts. keep in mind that the burden of proof in a legal context is "beyond reasonable doubt." if you have any contrary evidence that can cast doubt on these allegations (and i mean more than just contradicting them - "no he didn't...."), then let's bring it on.
in my view, it would be better for iraq's future to try hussein under a new iraqi government. this would help establish parameters for justice under the new system.
consider that hussein's crimes are not really crimes against humanity in the way the Holocaust was. they were crimes primarily against his own people, and also against iranians. it should be his own people (or a subset thereof) that try him, not some european judges wearing wigs.
summary: 1) health of the new iraq 2) jurisdiction
not at all - it's a perfectly human (albeit depraved) thing to kill thousands of people with airplanes. people have done it with less sophisticated plans.
my question to you is: does the fact that saddam or osama or bush or cheney or clinton or delay or daschle or gus hall is human make you less inclined to resist him? if so, why? shouldn't we be resisting institutionalized evil regardless of its form?
FUPIDS (fuzzy user of profiles intrusion detection system) is a Patch for the OpenBSD -- Kernel. FUPIDS produces user profiles and supervises their activities. Momentarily is limited to the evaluation of the programs used by the user, however still by some intelligent ueberwachungsstrategien will extend. Which I still planned at nice features experience one as soon as I it programmed and/or for any reasons directly into the ton DO -- list on the project side wrote.
(for those who don't know exactly what he's referring to, here's the link.)
i think you're misreading the apple license. it doesn't mean you can install it on as many servers as you like, it only means you can connect to it with as many file-sharing clients as you like at one time. kind of like the windows server line - the basic license only allows 5 clients to connect at a time.
red hat may turn out to be a better deal since they don't limit the number of clients that can connect to your samba server.
actually, those of us who pre-ordered 3.4 have the privilege of getting the released CDs first. after they've completed those orders, everybody else gets to order.
Slashdot Mirror
it's hard to argue that the SC is republican, mostly because they take so many sides of seemingly identical issues. but it's actually not either one - depending on the specific jurisprudential issues at stake in each case, the justices may decide seemingly contradictory things.
so you can put them on record as supporting gay marriage, abortion, secret courts, against gay marriage, anti-abortion, pro-federalism, anti-federalism, etc. it all depends on what case the litigators bring to the Court. if i argue a particular set of issues to the Court, they may decide that my argument is crappy and rule in favor of my opponent, solely because i built a weak case. if i argue a different set of issues that differ only slightly from the previous case, the Court may rule for me.
so what looks like inconsistency is actually the much-vaunted "nuance" that kerry would bring to the white house. whether you think nuance is a good thing for the executive branch, too, is one of ideology.
jon
but what if the GOP knew that someone would blame the democrats for trying to frame the republicans for something like this, and paid some anarchist (irony abounds) to steal the information?
a-HA! i have out-tinfoil-hatted you! your move.
jon
you underestimate the man. do you not think that he knows what is in his own political self-interest? he's got a safe seat in AZ and the media love him to death, so it's not like he's really taking any risks by speaking against his own party establishment and reaching across the aisle.
and there's a reason mccain is in the republican party: he thinks it's the best vehicle for his policies/career. if you didn't think that was true about him before, you should rethink your idealism.
jon
what if someone in the bush family, say, barbara (the younger), came out of the closet, denounced 41 and 43, and announced candidacy for the green party nomination? would you vote for her then because of her ideas, or would you still hate her because of her family?
i'm sorry if you think it's a foolish example, but i judge people by the content of their ideas and their character, not their lineage. that's what the Civil Rights movement in the 1960's was all about.
jon
when has someone posted *your* personal data wherever, as often as possible? aren't you subjecting them to an extra level of personal exposure, since they too live under USA PATRIOT and the DMCA?
and how does the DMCA affect your privacy, anyway?
jon
makes sense. if thoughts are describable as the operation of brain chemistry, then changes in the operations of brain chemistry would imply a change in thought patterns, and vice versa.
it's almost tautological.
jon
But if you don't have the key anymore, as per the parent, you can't produce a key you don't have.
jon
dude, turn them in now. only when the FTC knocks on their door will they actually start listening to you. why do you think whistle-blowers have to talk to the Feds in the first place? because their companies don't listen to them.
jon
My vote would be for a hydrogen-fuel-cell contest. DARPA should offer a humongous prize to the winner of a contest to retrofit an existing retail-market car to use hydrogen fuel cells, and achieve some amount of efficiency.
jon
"what happens if i die in the matrix?"
"the body cannot live without the mind."
jon the "morpheust"
so what, exactly, is unethical about moving jobs overseas? and is this statement supposed to cast doubt on the wisdom of going with iTunes?
jon
here's some brainstorming:
use randomly (or almost-randomly) chosen sites as seed sites. use the almost limitless blog or forum sites, or even usenet, to communicate. sure, this makes for long handshake times between peers, but it certainly reduces their vulnerability to DDoS.
this would allow one to find seed sites using google (or google-cache) and find the peers on such a site.
there are plenty of problems with this, but ideas never hurt.
jon
this needs to be modded up. the parent is just absurd.
jon
i was modifying the adage for rhetorical value. :) it is supposed to be "putting" as in "he was putting the tray on the counter when a bat bit him on the ear."
that particular cliche is fun, though, because it has so many ways to screw with it to get people to give you food:
- the proof of the tasting is pudding
- the pudding is tasty
- the proof is tasting pudding
- etc.
jon
i know this is slashdot and our standards of evidence/logic are pretty low, but....
there is nothing approaching a persuasive argument here. your first sentence uses an irrelevant conclusion and an ad hominem attack on White Christian Americans and US president bush, and the last three sentences are a straw man.
if you'd care to reformulate your response, i promise to give you a cohesive answer.
jon
two things.
1) the proof is in the putting - al qaeda was cranking out incriminating audio propaganda non-stop. in fact, in one tape, bin laden claimed that attacks on the world trade center were actually self-defense, and therefore supported by islamic law.
2) the presence in guantanamo bay of lots of known al qaeda operatives who have detailed their planning procedures for the september 11 attacks is a pretty good clue.
3) bin laden had already established a pattern of conduct with the USS cole and khobar towers bombings that made him particularly interesting to international terrorism experts. keep in mind that the burden of proof in a legal context is "beyond reasonable doubt." if you have any contrary evidence that can cast doubt on these allegations (and i mean more than just contradicting them - "no he didn't...."), then let's bring it on.
jon
in my view, it would be better for iraq's future to try hussein under a new iraqi government. this would help establish parameters for justice under the new system.
consider that hussein's crimes are not really crimes against humanity in the way the Holocaust was. they were crimes primarily against his own people, and also against iranians. it should be his own people (or a subset thereof) that try him, not some european judges wearing wigs.
summary:
1) health of the new iraq
2) jurisdiction
jon
not at all - it's a perfectly human (albeit depraved) thing to kill thousands of people with airplanes. people have done it with less sophisticated plans.
my question to you is: does the fact that saddam or osama or bush or cheney or clinton or delay or daschle or gus hall is human make you less inclined to resist him? if so, why? shouldn't we be resisting institutionalized evil regardless of its form?
jon
FUPIDS (fuzzy user of profiles intrusion detection system) is a Patch for the OpenBSD -- Kernel. FUPIDS produces user profiles and supervises their activities. Momentarily is limited to the evaluation of the programs used by the user, however still by some intelligent ueberwachungsstrategien will extend. Which I still planned at nice features experience one as soon as I it programmed and/or for any reasons directly into the ton DO -- list on the project side wrote.
babelfish.
this is also one of the easiest ways to boost your karma. there are SO many mod points to be had by posting non-troll comments in the BSD section.
(for those who don't know exactly what he's referring to, here's the link.)
i think you're misreading the apple license. it doesn't mean you can install it on as many servers as you like, it only means you can connect to it with as many file-sharing clients as you like at one time. kind of like the windows server line - the basic license only allows 5 clients to connect at a time.
red hat may turn out to be a better deal since they don't limit the number of clients that can connect to your samba server.
jon
oh, okay. i'll go do that.
done.
jon
but not, it needs to be said, nominated by conservatives.
jon
actually, those of us who pre-ordered 3.4 have the privilege of getting the released CDs first. after they've completed those orders, everybody else gets to order.
jon
this probably won't affect emergency vehicle radio bands.
jon