Great and grand until the the bastards grant them immunity for breaking the law again.
Do you really think that the government is going to give this a pass so that ads can be sold? Fuck no. It's going to be used as another spying opportunity when they deem fit stating, "all that information is just sitting there, why don't you give us some so we can hunt bad guys." This will just be abused when they deem it necessary to incarcerate you for a longer period of time on some trumped up charge. 1984 is just that much closer.
Vehicular Manslaughter is not Speeding.
Speeding is a victimless crime as it is defined and enforced. Drug use could just as easily lead to murder of innocent people, so by your own logic you would find it morally offensive, correct? I think that maybe emotion has clouded your logic. I do not blame you. I would find it hard to reconcile my beliefs on liberty with my emotions if something so tragic ever happened to my family. But try I would.
That is the problem with belief. It's fallible and you never know validity until after the fact. Logic is a much more trustworthy companion.
But I wouldn't blame any one who said "I still don't believe Hans did it," for saying it in the first place. No one wanted a respected open source contributor to bring the kind of mud slinging this will. It's going to be the same kind of witch hunt on geeks that it was after Columbine. Won't that be fun. Again.
This is retarded. How is giving more money and rewarding more vote switching going to solve anything. We need to look a little farther than in front of our noses here. I'm sick and tired of these people in office and we need to implement a scorched earth policy and vote out every incumbent we can.
Disappointing people by not taking an active role in the fight is not the same as supporting something.
And that's the moral high ground you hold your presidential candidate to? No wonder the US is scrapping the bottom of the barrel any more. You are aware of the term complacency? Last time I checked it wasn't a virtue.
Let's put it this way, since when has a libertarian ever wanted something from you or wanted you to give up a constitutional right? When was the last time a Republican wanted you to give up rights? When was the last time a Democrat wanted you to pay for something? These parties need slapped. We need to put the fear back into them. They need to know that they work for us, not the other way around. And we need to be slapped. We need to realize that it's government of the People, by the People, and for the People. That entails responsibility on behalf of the People, not complacency and blind trust.
The interesting thing is that qualities that make Powell an good candidate (intelligent, honest, outsider) are the same qualities that Obama seems to posess.
Maybe you should state it like this instead:
The interesting thing is that the qualities that I see in Powell that make him a good candidate are the same qualities that I see in Obama.
I would call the intelligence and honesty of both Obama and McCain into question. They are just good politicians.
I can agree along the lines of preventing major birth defects, but I just don't think it should be up to parents to pick only their own perceived 'good' genes to pass on. I think there is a need for the inherent randomness of procreation. If you want to think of it from a genetic algorithm point of view, It will prevent local maximums from hiding truly optimum results. I'm not against pruning the detrimental cruft, but we need to be careful about things that could one day save our species from total obliteration.
So, prevent defects, yes, engineer 'better' humans? whatcouldpossiblygowrong?
I'm not saying we need to hamstring every one for that reason. I am saying we don't need to make things so much better that people don't feel the need to fight against what they were born into. It is my belief that every one should try to supersede the supposed limitations on their talents. If some one is told they are as perfect as they can be 'engineered' to be, how complacent will one become? Then again being told this may yet ignite another reason to strive for greater achievement...
Interesting...
None the less, I'll fall back on to my Father's only axiom that has never failed me: "Diversity is stability":)
Let me put it this way, I find it hard to imagine a population that is more afraid of everything than the US population is right now, and still have the population produce anything of value.
There are also plenty of mildly 'defective' kids driven to work harder to over come adversity, and about the same amount of perfectly capable but lazy kids.
Strength of character can be learned from the right environment.
The government's job is to interpret the will of the people and represent the will of their people to make laws.
I don't think government should judge its employers. They aren't there to judge us unless we break a law. Its up to us to decide what should be law... or at least that's the ideal, not really the norm these days though. Can I get a head count of people who think speeding is morally wrong instead of ill-advised?
Would terrorism become a far more compelling tool? Would we spend eternity cowering inside private fortresses, fearing the slightest risks to our fragile immortality?
I find it hard to imagine a population with more irrational fear that the one right now. I'm a practical man, so no I don't have anything to fear from having a longer span of my life in which I can produce more ideas. Then again, work fills up the time allotted to it... It might be hard to stay motivated...
How else do you think that the next generation will pay for the social security and national debt of the baby boomers? If there is enough food and raw materials (big if), the wealth will be made, and government will want to tax it. Of course there is an alternate solution...
What each government should do on its own is kill its own war lords, put a large civilian force in place to stop more from popping up, and build 5 nuclear power plants. I can agree with that.
Would your rather have Business Vigilante groups, or an objective judge and jury for civil cases? If some one has been wronged, or has wronged some one else, I put their objectiveness in the matter into question, that's why I don't have a problem with the government settling civil disputes. Of course that assumes objectivity on behalf of the judicial system...
I don't toss out a blanket endorsement of "Intellectual Property" as it is called, but for physical property, you bet I do. My money is mine. On the other hand, ideas if shared in the same ideal of trading value for value is just fine by me. That's why I *like* the GPL. It enforces an honest trade of value. No developer or engineer who is always striving for improvement has anything to fear from GPL type of arrangements. The people who fear it are trying to get by with receiving an improportionate value for their work. Or at least that's how I see it.
I haven't moved out of my mom's basement?
I agree that placing your trust in government to solve any problem is a path to civil liberty hell. I was just pointing out that it really isn't likely that Japan will ever attack any one ever again, for better or worse. They had enough problems justifying support roles in Iraq. They have enough problems justifying the very existence of the JSDF at all to the populace because the populace places more trust in the US Armed Forces. Which is not to say that if they came up with strong AI they would keep the technology from the US, they just wouldn't use it to attack the US. They would most likely use it to enhance the US's military power, and prefer to keep using the US as a shield. Given some of the WWII tensions that still exist to this day, that prospect isn't such a bad thing for them or any one else in the region, *IF* the US could remain impartial politically and withdraw from every where but Japan. But I'm not going to hold my breath on any of that...
Greed is spiraling out of control, because those who spend wisely are impossibly outnumbered by the ravenous fools of our society.
That is still no reason not to demand value for the value you offer. In a system where fools have no safety net, which is paid for now by those who spend wisely, we wouldn't have this problem. The greed you speak of is not capitalism. The greed you speak of is the one where people want value they have no right to, and force value from those who do have it. Whither those who hold value now have come about it 'justly' or not is of little consequence to the morality of taking it from them now. That becomes a chicken and egg argument. And also indicates that if you yourself will trade in value, instead of trying to swindle, cheat and steal, the cycle may be broken. But the theft of value has become institutionalized by the welfare state. To do the most good, where do you think think we should start then? I think the government should stop stealing from us and giving to ravenous fools, plain and simple.
Slashdot Mirror
No mention of BattleTech novels? I thought we were geeks here.
Great and grand until the the bastards grant them immunity for breaking the law again.
Do you really think that the government is going to give this a pass so that ads can be sold? Fuck no. It's going to be used as another spying opportunity when they deem fit stating, "all that information is just sitting there, why don't you give us some so we can hunt bad guys."
This will just be abused when they deem it necessary to incarcerate you for a longer period of time on some trumped up charge. 1984 is just that much closer.
Vehicular Manslaughter is not Speeding.
Speeding is a victimless crime as it is defined and enforced. Drug use could just as easily lead to murder of innocent people, so by your own logic you would find it morally offensive, correct? I think that maybe emotion has clouded your logic. I do not blame you. I would find it hard to reconcile my beliefs on liberty with my emotions if something so tragic ever happened to my family. But try I would.
I am truly sorry for your loss.
That is the problem with belief. It's fallible and you never know validity until after the fact. Logic is a much more trustworthy companion.
But I wouldn't blame any one who said "I still don't believe Hans did it," for saying it in the first place. No one wanted a respected open source contributor to bring the kind of mud slinging this will. It's going to be the same kind of witch hunt on geeks that it was after Columbine. Won't that be fun. Again.
It has USB host access so I don't see why a keyboard is out of the question.
Well if it you want a cell phone that is analogous to the OLPC, then then you want the Neo FreeRunner from Openmoko, not the iPhone.
Onstar.
If it's being built in Europe, if anything it's going to be over-safe and cost inflated.
This is retarded. How is giving more money and rewarding more vote switching going to solve anything. We need to look a little farther than in front of our noses here. I'm sick and tired of these people in office and we need to implement a scorched earth policy and vote out every incumbent we can.
Disappointing people by not taking an active role in the fight is not the same as supporting something.
And that's the moral high ground you hold your presidential candidate to? No wonder the US is scrapping the bottom of the barrel any more. You are aware of the term complacency? Last time I checked it wasn't a virtue.
Let's put it this way, since when has a libertarian ever wanted something from you or wanted you to give up a constitutional right? When was the last time a Republican wanted you to give up rights? When was the last time a Democrat wanted you to pay for something? These parties need slapped. We need to put the fear back into them. They need to know that they work for us, not the other way around. And we need to be slapped. We need to realize that it's government of the People, by the People, and for the People. That entails responsibility on behalf of the People, not complacency and blind trust.
The interesting thing is that qualities that make Powell an good candidate (intelligent, honest, outsider) are the same qualities that Obama seems to posess.
Maybe you should state it like this instead:
The interesting thing is that the qualities that I see in Powell that make him a good candidate are the same qualities that I see in Obama.
I would call the intelligence and honesty of both Obama and McCain into question. They are just good politicians.
I think Gumstix are so popular precisely because they are completely open.
I can agree along the lines of preventing major birth defects, but I just don't think it should be up to parents to pick only their own perceived 'good' genes to pass on. I think there is a need for the inherent randomness of procreation. If you want to think of it from a genetic algorithm point of view, It will prevent local maximums from hiding truly optimum results. I'm not against pruning the detrimental cruft, but we need to be careful about things that could one day save our species from total obliteration.
So, prevent defects, yes, engineer 'better' humans? whatcouldpossiblygowrong?
I'm not saying we need to hamstring every one for that reason. I am saying we don't need to make things so much better that people don't feel the need to fight against what they were born into. It is my belief that every one should try to supersede the supposed limitations on their talents. If some one is told they are as perfect as they can be 'engineered' to be, how complacent will one become? Then again being told this may yet ignite another reason to strive for greater achievement...
:)
Interesting...
None the less, I'll fall back on to my Father's only axiom that has never failed me: "Diversity is stability"
Let me put it this way, I find it hard to imagine a population that is more afraid of everything than the US population is right now, and still have the population produce anything of value.
There are also plenty of mildly 'defective' kids driven to work harder to over come adversity, and about the same amount of perfectly capable but lazy kids.
Strength of character can be learned from the right environment.
The government's job is to interpret the will of the people and represent the will of their people to make laws.
I don't think government should judge its employers. They aren't there to judge us unless we break a law. Its up to us to decide what should be law... or at least that's the ideal, not really the norm these days though. Can I get a head count of people who think speeding is morally wrong instead of ill-advised?
Suggested Reading
Would terrorism become a far more compelling tool? Would we spend eternity cowering inside private fortresses, fearing the slightest risks to our fragile immortality?
I find it hard to imagine a population with more irrational fear that the one right now. I'm a practical man, so no I don't have anything to fear from having a longer span of my life in which I can produce more ideas. Then again, work fills up the time allotted to it... It might be hard to stay motivated...
How else do you think that the next generation will pay for the social security and national debt of the baby boomers?
If there is enough food and raw materials (big if), the wealth will be made, and government will want to tax it. Of course there is an alternate solution...
Would your rather have Business Vigilante groups, or an objective judge and jury for civil cases? If some one has been wronged, or has wronged some one else, I put their objectiveness in the matter into question, that's why I don't have a problem with the government settling civil disputes. Of course that assumes objectivity on behalf of the judicial system...
I don't toss out a blanket endorsement of "Intellectual Property" as it is called, but for physical property, you bet I do. My money is mine. On the other hand, ideas if shared in the same ideal of trading value for value is just fine by me. That's why I *like* the GPL. It enforces an honest trade of value. No developer or engineer who is always striving for improvement has anything to fear from GPL type of arrangements. The people who fear it are trying to get by with receiving an improportionate value for their work. Or at least that's how I see it.
I haven't moved out of my mom's basement?
I agree that placing your trust in government to solve any problem is a path to civil liberty hell. I was just pointing out that it really isn't likely that Japan will ever attack any one ever again, for better or worse. They had enough problems justifying support roles in Iraq. They have enough problems justifying the very existence of the JSDF at all to the populace because the populace places more trust in the US Armed Forces. Which is not to say that if they came up with strong AI they would keep the technology from the US, they just wouldn't use it to attack the US. They would most likely use it to enhance the US's military power, and prefer to keep using the US as a shield. Given some of the WWII tensions that still exist to this day, that prospect isn't such a bad thing for them or any one else in the region, *IF* the US could remain impartial politically and withdraw from every where but Japan. But I'm not going to hold my breath on any of that...
That is still no reason not to demand value for the value you offer. In a system where fools have no safety net, which is paid for now by those who spend wisely, we wouldn't have this problem. The greed you speak of is not capitalism. The greed you speak of is the one where people want value they have no right to, and force value from those who do have it. Whither those who hold value now have come about it 'justly' or not is of little consequence to the morality of taking it from them now. That becomes a chicken and egg argument. And also indicates that if you yourself will trade in value, instead of trying to swindle, cheat and steal, the cycle may be broken. But the theft of value has become institutionalized by the welfare state. To do the most good, where do you think think we should start then? I think the government should stop stealing from us and giving to ravenous fools, plain and simple.