While the 'faces in the ground' may be a little too much, I do, in fact, want the cops to respond to complaints that people are being shot in public parks, and if you think for a second you will agree with me.
They cannot make you hand over the key to a safety deposit box or the combination to a safe in the US. (Well, if you're in possession of a key, and they find it, they'll take it from you. But you can't be forced to say where the key is.)
The police cannot force us to reveal any information at all if we're a suspect, and cannot threaten us with punishment if we don't help them.
Note 'not helping' is not the same as 'actively subverting'. It would be illegal for us to, say, tamper with the contents of a safe simply because they're off looking for a way to blow it. Unless, of course, they haven't found the safe yet, and thus it's not evidence yet.
When material is criminalized solely based on the purposes it could be used to accomplish (the most common reason given for criminalizing child pornography), child pornography is in exactly the same boat as "cracking tools" are.
Are you on drugs? Please explain to me what illegal purposes people use child pornography for. Why...NONE!
Possession of it is illegal because making it is illegal. It has nothing to do with what people use it for.
And I'm glad the CSC actually looked at the laws with some sense, and said 'If the sex wasn't illegal in the first place, the result isn't automatically illegal'. I've always thought it stupid people under 18 could logically be arrested for carrying nude pictures of themselves or people they have legally had sex with.
However, this has very little bearing, as most child pornography is illegal to make, involving either child molestation or statutory rape, not to mention child labor laws and getting consent of the parents.
Regardless of that, child pornography is NOTHING like 'a tool that can be used to commit a crime', it's 'the result of a crime that has probably been commited'. It's not selling guns, a tool that can be used for evil, it's selling decapitated heads. Which is also illegal.
When were we bombed? Burned to the ground, yeah, but not bombed.;)
Anyway, Altanta doesn't actually exist as a city, it's just an airport and a traffic jam (tearing up part of I-285 this tomorrow, w00t), with about 100 miles of suburbs.;)
What kind of city has this kind of traffic, seriously? We get friggin reverse rush hour, people backing up leaving the city in the morning and coming in in the afternoon, on SR 400. What the hell is up with that?
Miranda's murder was never solved because the suspect invoked his right to remain silent. Now that's ironic.
I don't understand your sig. It's like saying 'Louis Gehrig died of Louis Gehrig's disease. Now that's ironic.' DUH.
The suspect in the Miranda case, IIRC, didn't know he had the right to remain silent. He thought he had to answer police questions without a lawyer. His confession was thus thrown out, and the 'Miranda Rights' were invented, things police have to inform a suspect before questioning.
Or are you against informing people of their rights in the first place? It seems a little hypocritical, as you clearly know these rights, to think it's a good idea to not tell others.
BZZZT. Wrong. The GPL is a license for people to copy the software. If you don't like the GPL, no one's forcing you to agree to it at all to use the software. You just don't have the ability to hand the software out. Just like all other software under copyright law.
On the other hand, the MS EULA is a 'clickthrough' license, that is a usage license. You have to agree to it before using the software.
The only things that you can't do with GPL software are the exact same things you can't do with a freeware program you download off the internet, or any piece of software without a license. The MS license, however, restricts a right you normally would have under copyright law.
-David T. C.
Re:What about Stargate SG-1
on
Andromeda
·
· Score: 1
You do realize that RDA is the star of the show, right? That the beginning, in fact, say 'Starring Richard Dean Anderson'?
And, BTW, for someone who gets the 'best lines', he sure gets some lines that make him out to be a complete idiot.
And I kinda have to point out, the other characters really do get more story then he does. For example, with Daniel we have his wife and her children, with T'ealk (sp?) you have his wife, his son, his mentor, heck he has a whole planet, with Sam, you have her father, etc, plus Jollanare's (sp?) backstory...
All those are (or were) important and reoccuring characters. All Jack has is an ex-wife we've only seen in the movie, and a dead son. Everyone else has a direct connection to the other side of the Stargate, all Jack has is he's friends with Thor.
For him being the star, the show is actually a lot more balanced then other shows.
-David T. C.
Re:It's all about the ladies
on
Andromeda
·
· Score: 1
The exchange between Rommy and Harper, who made Rommy's body, about 'certain aspects of it that seem unrelated to my function', and asking if he wore gloves during building it was rather funny. Looks like he made her anatomically correct.
And, of course, he's the one who has to repair her, too.
-David T. C.
Re:They'll NEVER beat Babylon 5
on
Andromeda
·
· Score: 1
Roddenberry produced exactly three shows that were picked up by someone: Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation, and Star Trek: Deep Space 9.
The first of that, Star Trek, was canceled after 3 years, brought back as an animated series, then as a series of movies.
The other two have enjoyed full seven year runs, and one of them has turned out three movies so far, with another on the way.
By any objective standard, he's a damned successful producer. A total of 17 years of TV, an animated series, and 10 movies were based directly off his concepts.
Everything else that says 'Roddenberry' is from notes, and was produced after his death. (Well, granted, he made a few pilots that didn't pan out, too.) You can't blame a man for writing down a story idea, and having people use it after his death.
At some point, we really need (-1: Wrong) moderation added. Although we'd have to make it clear it's not for opinions you disagree with, but with posts that just have all their facts 100% wrong. Like this post.
Instant streaming, and downloading at the same time, and assuming the connection is fast enough, you can start playing the file as soon as you start downloading it, and play the whole thing.
(Yes, I'm sure there's some way to get wget to pipe to tee and mpg123, and whatnot, but this is actually easy to type.;) )
As far back as I can remember, Microsoft has never publically stated that Linux is purely evil;
Did you read the article? Hell, did you even read the friggin title of the page?
Hint: Cancer is considered a very Bad Thing.
-David T. C.
Re:The laws are giving us insight into our country
on
Killing Video Games
·
· Score: 1
I can't remember the quote or the source, but one of the founding fathers stated that this government was only workable under a Christian nation.
This guy is either stupid or this is a troll. I recommend posting some links, but not posting any text in response. If this is a troll, it's impossible to reply to, while if this guy is just misinformed he'll be corrected.
Personally, I'm banking on the troll, because no one on earth would talk about a quote that they couldn't remember what it said or who said it.
Re:High Warp Restriction?
on
Voyager Eulogy
·
· Score: 1
And what I pointed out is that the 'order of events' is meaningless unless you're in the same place later on. If an explosion happens a lightyear away from another explosion, that first explosion happened a year later. If you were at the place of the second explosion, the first explosion happened a year later.
Does't look like the order of events is the same to me. What he's talking about is 'causality', which relativity just kinda assumes.
Relativity doesn't, BTW, forbid either going backwards in time or going faster then light. In fact, there are several places that can happen under current theories. The first comes to mind as a rotating torus you go though, and the second as the over-used-on-star-trek-but-might-actually-exist tachyons, which travel faster then light. (And also go backwards in time, but you can go backwards in time without going faster then light under current theory, by using the rotating torus that swaps space and time that I just mentioned.)
Now, relativity competely and totally ignores the idea 'mis-causality', aka, a paradox, might happen, so, in a sense, time travel is 'impossible' under relativity, simply because we have no theory that says what would happen. But that's like saying singularities are impossible because we don't know what happen in them. It's not literally impossible, under ralativity, to travel though time.
Slashdot Mirror
While the 'faces in the ground' may be a little too much, I do, in fact, want the cops to respond to complaints that people are being shot in public parks, and if you think for a second you will agree with me.
-David T. C.
Um...how does the Australian government violate an American right?
-David T. C.
The police cannot force us to reveal any information at all if we're a suspect, and cannot threaten us with punishment if we don't help them.
Note 'not helping' is not the same as 'actively subverting'. It would be illegal for us to, say, tamper with the contents of a safe simply because they're off looking for a way to blow it. Unless, of course, they haven't found the safe yet, and thus it's not evidence yet.
-David T. C.
Of course, if you don't, they'll bust down the door and go in anyway, so it's easier just to open it.
-David T. C.
I cannot believe this dumbass pleaded guilty to this.
-David T. C.
Are you on drugs? Please explain to me what illegal purposes people use child pornography for. Why...NONE!
Possession of it is illegal because making it is illegal. It has nothing to do with what people use it for.
And I'm glad the CSC actually looked at the laws with some sense, and said 'If the sex wasn't illegal in the first place, the result isn't automatically illegal'. I've always thought it stupid people under 18 could logically be arrested for carrying nude pictures of themselves or people they have legally had sex with.
However, this has very little bearing, as most child pornography is illegal to make, involving either child molestation or statutory rape, not to mention child labor laws and getting consent of the parents.
Regardless of that, child pornography is NOTHING like 'a tool that can be used to commit a crime', it's 'the result of a crime that has probably been commited'. It's not selling guns, a tool that can be used for evil, it's selling decapitated heads. Which is also illegal.
-David T. C.
Anyway, Altanta doesn't actually exist as a city, it's just an airport and a traffic jam (tearing up part of I-285 this tomorrow, w00t), with about 100 miles of suburbs. ;)
What kind of city has this kind of traffic, seriously? We get friggin reverse rush hour, people backing up leaving the city in the morning and coming in in the afternoon, on SR 400. What the hell is up with that?
-David T. C.
I don't understand your sig. It's like saying 'Louis Gehrig died of Louis Gehrig's disease. Now that's ironic.' DUH.
The suspect in the Miranda case, IIRC, didn't know he had the right to remain silent. He thought he had to answer police questions without a lawyer. His confession was thus thrown out, and the 'Miranda Rights' were invented, things police have to inform a suspect before questioning.
Or are you against informing people of their rights in the first place? It seems a little hypocritical, as you clearly know these rights, to think it's a good idea to not tell others.
-David T. C.
Ah, yes, Harrison Ford, Sean Connery, George Lucas, and Steven Spielberg are working in secret on the movie. Riiiight.
-David T. C.
Dude, linking to a product page doesn't prove said product is well known.
-David T. C.
BZZZT. Wrong. The GPL is a license for people to copy the software. If you don't like the GPL, no one's forcing you to agree to it at all to use the software. You just don't have the ability to hand the software out. Just like all other software under copyright law.
On the other hand, the MS EULA is a 'clickthrough' license, that is a usage license. You have to agree to it before using the software.
The only things that you can't do with GPL software are the exact same things you can't do with a freeware program you download off the internet, or any piece of software without a license. The MS license, however, restricts a right you normally would have under copyright law.
-David T. C.
And, BTW, for someone who gets the 'best lines', he sure gets some lines that make him out to be a complete idiot.
And I kinda have to point out, the other characters really do get more story then he does. For example, with Daniel we have his wife and her children, with T'ealk (sp?) you have his wife, his son, his mentor, heck he has a whole planet, with Sam, you have her father, etc, plus Jollanare's (sp?) backstory...
All those are (or were) important and reoccuring characters. All Jack has is an ex-wife we've only seen in the movie, and a dead son. Everyone else has a direct connection to the other side of the Stargate, all Jack has is he's friends with Thor.
For him being the star, the show is actually a lot more balanced then other shows.
-David T. C.
And, of course, he's the one who has to repair her, too.
-David T. C.
The first of that, Star Trek, was canceled after 3 years, brought back as an animated series, then as a series of movies.
The other two have enjoyed full seven year runs, and one of them has turned out three movies so far, with another on the way.
By any objective standard, he's a damned successful producer. A total of 17 years of TV, an animated series, and 10 movies were based directly off his concepts.
Everything else that says 'Roddenberry' is from notes, and was produced after his death. (Well, granted, he made a few pilots that didn't pan out, too.) You can't blame a man for writing down a story idea, and having people use it after his death.
-David T. C.
And sometimes Andromeda's projections, and Rommy.
-David T. C.
I think that honor belongs to The Illuminatus Trilogy. ;) Though they may be right behind it.
-David T. C.
At some point, we really need (-1: Wrong) moderation added. Although we'd have to make it clear it's not for opinions you disagree with, but with posts that just have all their facts 100% wrong. Like this post.
-David T. C.
wget http://server.com/somefile.mp3 &
dd if=somefile.mp3 | mpg123 -
Instant streaming, and downloading at the same time, and assuming the connection is fast enough, you can start playing the file as soon as you start downloading it, and play the whole thing.
(Yes, I'm sure there's some way to get wget to pipe to tee and mpg123, and whatnot, but this is actually easy to type. ;) )
-David T. C.
I think we should move to Esperanto.
-David T. C.
Did you read the article? Hell, did you even read the friggin title of the page?
Hint: Cancer is considered a very Bad Thing.
-David T. C.
This guy is either stupid or this is a troll. I recommend posting some links, but not posting any text in response. If this is a troll, it's impossible to reply to, while if this guy is just misinformed he'll be corrected.
Personally, I'm banking on the troll, because no one on earth would talk about a quote that they couldn't remember what it said or who said it.
-David T. C.
Someone needs a sarcasm detector.
-David T. C.
Does't look like the order of events is the same to me. What he's talking about is 'causality', which relativity just kinda assumes.
Relativity doesn't, BTW, forbid either going backwards in time or going faster then light. In fact, there are several places that can happen under current theories. The first comes to mind as a rotating torus you go though, and the second as the over-used-on-star-trek-but-might-actually-exist tachyons, which travel faster then light. (And also go backwards in time, but you can go backwards in time without going faster then light under current theory, by using the rotating torus that swaps space and time that I just mentioned.)
Now, relativity competely and totally ignores the idea 'mis-causality', aka, a paradox, might happen, so, in a sense, time travel is 'impossible' under relativity, simply because we have no theory that says what would happen. But that's like saying singularities are impossible because we don't know what happen in them. It's not literally impossible, under ralativity, to travel though time.
-David T. C.
If I say you can use my programs under X, Y, and Z licenses, and X is ruled invalid, you can still use it under Y and Z.
-David T. C.
There is no way it was just on NPR. And following up to yourself is really sad.
-David T. C.