Or, Physical Education could focus on the science of physical fitness instead of games. If PE would teach kids that moving more and eating less = weight loss instead of what a double-play is in baseball, PE would be relevant again. If PE would teach students the lifelong benefits of exercise, and how calories work, and which muscle groups do what, instead of lining up 10 goth-kids to get blasted in the face by the one jock kid during dodgeball, then PE would be relevant again.
I didn't RTFA, but at least read the summary. The forensic experts will be searching for
any file-sharing information associated with each file
. I'm no forensics expert, but it's pretty easy to tell which of my music files were purchased on iTunes, which ones were ripped from CD, and which ones I torrented. Even if I went through the trouble to disguise the source of the torrented files, computer forensic people would be able to see past that easily.
A bigger sample size? 12 years in the military, and 10 more in the Defense industry isn't a big enough sample size for you? I have conservative leanings as well, but I'm not blinded by my political leanings to the point that reality is no longer reality, which most of my conservative friends can't say.
True, however, the left doesn't have a thriving AM talk radio industry that acts as the largest echo chamber on the planet! I have many liberal and conservative friends. By definition, none of my liberal friends tune into a single news source to listen to something just so they can agree. None of my liberal friends watch anything as echoey as Fox News, nor do they listen to three angry white men in a row on the radio (Rush Limbaugh, Neil Boortz, Local Nutjob) spewing the same talking points all day long. Just sayin'...
If you'd like to posit that connecting your computer to the Internet is just as dangerous as driving a car or operating a crane, then I'd posit you are a paranoid.
The Federal Govt. isn't mandated to provide safe highways either, but they sure do go out of their way to withhold funding from States who don't impose speed limits.
It may, however, be a legal requirement to have the necessary understanding to avoid harming other people with technology before being allowed to use it.
But it isn't, nor should it be. You'd never get such a law to pass.
I'm doing my part--I don't use Windows. That's more helpful than all the AV software in the world, from what I hear.
This is totally a case of blaming the victims, because you should be going after the idiots who push this stuff on us, not those of us who unknowingly pass it along. It's not against the law to be stupid, uninformed and ignorant when it comes to operating a personal computer.
You can't pay me enough to infect my computer with the crappy anti-virus software out there. Until AV software does more good than harm, I'll just continue on spreading my germs.
I took the author's advice and skimmed, but does he seriously advocate penalizing people for using their computers without AV software? Can we penalize people for spreading the flu, because they didn't wash their hands? Is this some sort of perverted blaming of the victim, or did I skim too quickly?
"...if this were to pass", as in after it passes, you really have no recourse. So get involved early and often--It's better than waiting for a stupid law to get passed then just blowing it off just because *randomslashdotuser* thinks it's unconstitutional. I think you are delusional if you think your congressperson cares what you think (unless it's close to election day).
Hmmm, since you guys don't seem to listen and want to immediately Godwin my ass, maybe I should try a different approach.
I would like to make it illegal to murder people. If you shoot a person and kill them, I will come after you for murder, not for using a gun. The same thing here applies (I assume, not my law). It is impossible to ban words (guns) so you go after the action of bullying (murdering).
Oh wow, now that I see what that is, I'm highly offended. I wasn't inferring that I don't do those things so I have nothing to worry about, as your "First they came for" insult infers. If you read my entire post, it should be clear that I understand the risks. That's why I said I dont' support this bill, but the ultimate success or failure of this bill does not depend on my opinion.
Actually, I don't even HAVE a blog--I was merely pointing out that if you personally don't write stuff that would violate this law, then there would be no way for you to be in violation of the law. Disagree with a law all you want, but your only recourse, if this thing were to pass, would be to challenge its constitutionality. You don't get to make the rules about what is constitutional or not, is all I'm saying. Your interpretation of the constitution, surprise, is not the final say, as much as you'd probably like to think it is.
Microsoft isn't the government, thus cannot be guilty of violating my constitutional rights via censorship. I could sue them for civil damages, however.
You should have read more than the headline because frankly, the headline sucks. This bill strives to make "severe, repeated, and hostile" speech used in cyberbullying a criminal offense. Since MY blog doesn't have any of that stuff, this bill would not be able to declare my blog a weapon. By no means am I supporting this bill, but also by no means do I consider this alarmist headline to have any validity.
Good point. Not sure why your post wasn't marked informative but the guy going on about outdated floppy drives was. In any case, as evil as it may seem that Apple makes the hardware AND the OS, you've highlighted the primary reason "it just works". Good luck to all those budget-minded OSX users putting OSX on their cheapie Dells!
Can't speak for gadgets, but widgets works better hidden, and invoked using an F-key or a mouse button. From what I've seen of gadgets (at Best Buy) they seem to be always open on the right side, which would seem to be very annoying to me.
Slashdot Mirror
So you think the only information available about a file is the tags you as a user can see and manipulate? Well, good look with your defense.
Or, Physical Education could focus on the science of physical fitness instead of games. If PE would teach kids that moving more and eating less = weight loss instead of what a double-play is in baseball, PE would be relevant again. If PE would teach students the lifelong benefits of exercise, and how calories work, and which muscle groups do what, instead of lining up 10 goth-kids to get blasted in the face by the one jock kid during dodgeball, then PE would be relevant again.
To be fair, the left tried... but nobody wanted to listen.
Why let facts get in the way of your otherwise incorrect arguments? http://www.airamerica.com/
any file-sharing information associated with each file
. I'm no forensics expert, but it's pretty easy to tell which of my music files were purchased on iTunes, which ones were ripped from CD, and which ones I torrented. Even if I went through the trouble to disguise the source of the torrented files, computer forensic people would be able to see past that easily.
A bigger sample size? 12 years in the military, and 10 more in the Defense industry isn't a big enough sample size for you? I have conservative leanings as well, but I'm not blinded by my political leanings to the point that reality is no longer reality, which most of my conservative friends can't say.
True, however, the left doesn't have a thriving AM talk radio industry that acts as the largest echo chamber on the planet! I have many liberal and conservative friends. By definition, none of my liberal friends tune into a single news source to listen to something just so they can agree. None of my liberal friends watch anything as echoey as Fox News, nor do they listen to three angry white men in a row on the radio (Rush Limbaugh, Neil Boortz, Local Nutjob) spewing the same talking points all day long. Just sayin'...
And (Windows 7) definitely has real world pro's against OSX
Well, we're listening...
You had me at "porn" and "doable".
I can't believe you were marked troll. I'm using "echo chamber" from now on...brilliant!
If you'd like to posit that connecting your computer to the Internet is just as dangerous as driving a car or operating a crane, then I'd posit you are a paranoid.
The Federal Govt. isn't mandated to provide safe highways either, but they sure do go out of their way to withhold funding from States who don't impose speed limits.
It may, however, be a legal requirement to have the necessary understanding to avoid harming other people with technology before being allowed to use it.
But it isn't, nor should it be. You'd never get such a law to pass.
Care to explain why the law should protect the stupid
Because in free societies, it isn't illegal to not understand technology.
I'm doing my part--I don't use Windows. That's more helpful than all the AV software in the world, from what I hear.
This is totally a case of blaming the victims, because you should be going after the idiots who push this stuff on us, not those of us who unknowingly pass it along. It's not against the law to be stupid, uninformed and ignorant when it comes to operating a personal computer.
You can't pay me enough to infect my computer with the crappy anti-virus software out there. Until AV software does more good than harm, I'll just continue on spreading my germs.
I took the author's advice and skimmed, but does he seriously advocate penalizing people for using their computers without AV software? Can we penalize people for spreading the flu, because they didn't wash their hands? Is this some sort of perverted blaming of the victim, or did I skim too quickly?
Alex Jones, is that you?
"...if this were to pass", as in after it passes, you really have no recourse. So get involved early and often--It's better than waiting for a stupid law to get passed then just blowing it off just because *randomslashdotuser* thinks it's unconstitutional. I think you are delusional if you think your congressperson cares what you think (unless it's close to election day).
Hmmm, since you guys don't seem to listen and want to immediately Godwin my ass, maybe I should try a different approach.
I would like to make it illegal to murder people. If you shoot a person and kill them, I will come after you for murder, not for using a gun. The same thing here applies (I assume, not my law). It is impossible to ban words (guns) so you go after the action of bullying (murdering).
Oh wow, now that I see what that is, I'm highly offended. I wasn't inferring that I don't do those things so I have nothing to worry about, as your "First they came for" insult infers. If you read my entire post, it should be clear that I understand the risks. That's why I said I dont' support this bill, but the ultimate success or failure of this bill does not depend on my opinion.
Actually, I don't even HAVE a blog--I was merely pointing out that if you personally don't write stuff that would violate this law, then there would be no way for you to be in violation of the law. Disagree with a law all you want, but your only recourse, if this thing were to pass, would be to challenge its constitutionality. You don't get to make the rules about what is constitutional or not, is all I'm saying. Your interpretation of the constitution, surprise, is not the final say, as much as you'd probably like to think it is.
Maybe it isn't old or tired enough, because I have no idea what "At first they came for" means.
Microsoft isn't the government, thus cannot be guilty of violating my constitutional rights via censorship. I could sue them for civil damages, however.
"Sown" eh? Thanks for participating.
You should have read more than the headline because frankly, the headline sucks. This bill strives to make "severe, repeated, and hostile" speech used in cyberbullying a criminal offense. Since MY blog doesn't have any of that stuff, this bill would not be able to declare my blog a weapon. By no means am I supporting this bill, but also by no means do I consider this alarmist headline to have any validity.
Good point. Not sure why your post wasn't marked informative but the guy going on about outdated floppy drives was. In any case, as evil as it may seem that Apple makes the hardware AND the OS, you've highlighted the primary reason "it just works". Good luck to all those budget-minded OSX users putting OSX on their cheapie Dells!
Can't speak for gadgets, but widgets works better hidden, and invoked using an F-key or a mouse button. From what I've seen of gadgets (at Best Buy) they seem to be always open on the right side, which would seem to be very annoying to me.