How could a person or group express an opinion that would get the highest possible google rank when a person searches for BoA? That is what this is all about, isn't it?
Software patents must die. Patents were never designed to protect ideas--especially mathematical ideas and a computer program is a mathematical idea that has been written down.
Copyright your code, treat it as a trade secret, but don't roadblock other developers from independently deriving their own mathematical ideas, however abstractly expresed. If you have code that you can link to a particular machine of yours, fine. But pure code must be free.
I see this thing as a ******* free speech issue. Mathematical speech is speech. So long as you're not copying somebody else's ******* speech, then you can say or write whatever the **** you want. This is ******* ******* America and it ****** me the **** off.
In many States, citizens possess the power of initiative, where laws can be presented directly to the people.
A law that decriminalizes recording law enforcement officers acting within the scope of their duties or acting during their working hours (and immunizes the same conduct) is something, I suspect, that the general voting population would support.
If you care, get out there, conspire with others and ACT. I guarantee that you will be surprised at your results.
Look at what the no-tax freaks accomplished. It IS possible--don't let the naysayers with their weak arguments keep you down. Look at the crime victims' bill of rights that many states now have--those generally come from citizen activity!
There is almost zero downside to political activism of this sort in the US. You won't get killed (like you might in some other country) and you are likely to face negligible negative consequences. The worst that can likely happen is that you will fail. But think of all that you will learn in the process: Media manipulation . . . public speaking . . . organization . . . logistics . ... That experience will make you more effective the next time . . .
I haven't heard a single resonant argument since gays in the military became an issue.
The opposition's arguments are the same arguments used to oppose desegregation in the military. The pro-segregation arguments have been trashed by sixty years experience.
When you think about it, the whole brouhaha is really stupid. Back in the sixties, during Vietnam, homosexuality was still a powerful taboo to almost all of male Americans (even the gay ones). Men went to Canada, when all they had to do to legally get out of going to war is express sexual orientation towards other men.
Time has passed this nonsense by. It would be seriously fucked if a young man could avoid the draft just by bringing a sex video of himself doing a sex act with another man. People would certainly avail themselves of that nowadays if the war was unpopular.
Those in power who want to send men into the meatgrinder of war surely have this on their mind. They don't want their manpower (cannon fodder) pool compromised by an easy way to avoid the draft.
There is no way around this if you want to have a fair draft that hits every man evenly. (And don't get me started on upper middle class deferments).
Fierce competition with razor-thin margins will weed out the weak. Then, the strong get weeded out. You're left with a few really efficient businesses and a whole bunch of unemployed people--unemployed (former) consumers. Too much concentration means that fewer people share in the fruits of everyone's labor. That, in turn, hurts the "efficient" businesses and everyone else.
Everybody profits when everybody works well. Too much competition is destructive for everyone. Competition is a necessary component of a healthy economy, but it must be regulated.
Everybody in the movie industry worships the big score. Big capital is banked on the hope of a big hit. Big expensive special effects are seen as a means to that end.
But modern effects technology also enables the production of quality-made inexpensive films. And things are only going to get cheaper . . .
I, for one, welcome the arrival of our new independent movie production overlords!
The movies produced by the big studios have always been driven by the profit motive. "Art" was only valuable to the studios if it contributed to the bottom line.
It is the same thing now. "Skins" will be used as long as they make money.
Preserve the old movies, but don't lament their transformation. Celebrate the utter vulgarity of the medium!
Someday, a creative team will craft a happy accident (like Casablanca or Genevieve) through the use of "skins". Look forward to that! Your memories of the old movies won't be debased--remember, you'll always have Paris.
". ..robbed him of the money to defend the charges." ???
The account that was frozen was an account SUPPOSEDLY used for Wikileaks donations. If I'm a donor and my Wikileaks donation goes to Assange's rape defense fund, I'm mighty angry.
The documents were taken by a private first class in the US Army. They were not that secure in the FIRST place. Any country with a halfway decent spy service has almost certainly already taken them.
I would also suspect that those documents contain disinformation precisely because they were so poorly secured.
This knowledge is already out there. The outrage et cetera is being manipulated.
There is no reason to suppose that people would not ally themselves with an artificial brain. People have already aligned themselves with Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Adolf Hitler, and Josef Stalin--allegiances with undisputedly bad people who ultimately served them very poorly. There is every reason to expect that people will form an allegiance to an artificial brain if that artificial brain causes those people to receive adequate food, shelter, and medical care.
That will be seriously weird. I can envision elections to appoint protectors of the artificial brain. If the military gets what it wants from the artificial brain, it will protect the artificial brain (and let the wars begin). The Artificial Brain will be able to forge shifting alliances with human groups that ensure its continued existence in power.
Imagine multiple corporations amassing ever more power as a consequence of direction by a superior artificial brain. That power is political power and it translates to control over people.
Slashdot Mirror
How could a person or group express an opinion that would get the highest possible google rank when a person searches for BoA?
That is what this is all about, isn't it?
Software patents must die. Patents were never designed to protect ideas--especially mathematical ideas and a computer program is a mathematical idea that has been written down.
Copyright your code, treat it as a trade secret, but don't roadblock other developers from independently deriving their own mathematical ideas, however abstractly expresed. If you have code that you can link to a particular machine of yours, fine. But pure code must be free.
I see this thing as a ******* free speech issue. Mathematical speech is speech. So long as you're not copying somebody else's ******* speech, then you can say or write whatever the **** you want. This is ******* ******* America and it ****** me the **** off.
Lawyers are like Bill Laimbeer. People only hate him if he isn't on their team.
That would work REALLY good:
Drug Dealer: Are you a cop?
Undercover Cop: Why, yes I am!
Drug Dealer: Have a nice day! Bye! Bye!
Undercover Cop: I've been told you want to hire a hitman?
Angry Wife: Before I answer that . . . are you a cop?
In many States, citizens possess the power of initiative, where laws can be presented directly to the people.
A law that decriminalizes recording law enforcement officers acting within the scope of their duties or acting during their working hours (and immunizes the same conduct) is something, I suspect, that the general voting population would support.
If you care, get out there, conspire with others and ACT. I guarantee that you will be surprised at your results.
Look at what the no-tax freaks accomplished. It IS possible--don't let the naysayers with their weak arguments keep you down. Look at the crime victims' bill of rights that many states now have--those generally come from citizen activity!
There is almost zero downside to political activism of this sort in the US. You won't get killed (like you might in some other country) and you are likely to face negligible negative consequences. The worst that can likely happen is that you will fail. But think of all that you will learn in the process: Media manipulation . . . public speaking . . . organization . . . logistics . . .. That experience will make you more effective the next time . . .
And then you will be a politician, my son.
Now, get off my lawn!
I haven't heard a single resonant argument since gays in the military became an issue.
The opposition's arguments are the same arguments used to oppose desegregation in the military. The pro-segregation arguments have been trashed by sixty years experience.
When you think about it, the whole brouhaha is really stupid. Back in the sixties, during Vietnam, homosexuality was still a powerful taboo to almost all of male Americans (even the gay ones). Men went to Canada, when all they had to do to legally get out of going to war is express sexual orientation towards other men.
Time has passed this nonsense by. It would be seriously fucked if a young man could avoid the draft just by bringing a sex video of himself doing a sex act with another man. People would certainly avail themselves of that nowadays if the war was unpopular.
Those in power who want to send men into the meatgrinder of war surely have this on their mind. They don't want their manpower (cannon fodder) pool compromised by an easy way to avoid the draft.
There is no way around this if you want to have a fair draft that hits every man evenly. (And don't get me started on upper middle class deferments).
Fierce competition with razor-thin margins will weed out the weak. Then, the strong get weeded out. You're left with a few really efficient businesses and a whole bunch of unemployed people--unemployed (former) consumers. Too much concentration means that fewer people share in the fruits of everyone's labor. That, in turn, hurts the "efficient" businesses and everyone else.
Everybody profits when everybody works well. Too much competition is destructive for everyone. Competition is a necessary component of a healthy economy, but it must be regulated.
It is standard procedure everywhere. The juror was contemptuous of the judge's orders and the judge was unwilling to sanction her.
Now if somebody could create a precise 3D milling machine that would trim that thing to precise tolerances . . . NOW that would be something!
The Iranians build bombs to destroy people. Their enemies work to to destroy Iran's capability to build bombs.
It's one big testosterone-saturated circle-jerk.
What a lot of wasted effort.
Imagine a computer with a copyrighted brand stamp on it.
Imagine a memory chip or a video card . . .
Congress will fix this, because it's just commercially TOO crazy.
And Time magazine supported the Vietnam War.
Who cares!
The ruling might not be the same if the email is intercepted from some other source.
Everybody in the movie industry worships the big score. Big capital is banked on the hope of a big hit. Big expensive special effects are seen as a means to that end.
But modern effects technology also enables the production of quality-made inexpensive films. And things are only going to get cheaper . . .
I, for one, welcome the arrival of our new independent movie production overlords!
What does ABBA have to do with this?
Three Rules:
(1) STFU
(2) Rule 1 always applies
(3) No exceptions
Anybody could have used the IP address. How do I figure out who? GOTO RULE 1.
I'm just stating a fact. If big companies get burned, then they direct their Congressional Agents to protect them.
Your post also infers that "reform" is necessarily a good thing. That ain't necessarily so.
I'd urge this on my mom and dad in an INSTANT. I'd never use it, but it would be great for them.
Abuses of the law lead to reform.
The movies produced by the big studios have always been driven by the profit motive. "Art" was only valuable to the studios if it contributed to the bottom line.
It is the same thing now. "Skins" will be used as long as they make money.
Preserve the old movies, but don't lament their transformation. Celebrate the utter vulgarity of the medium!
Someday, a creative team will craft a happy accident (like Casablanca or Genevieve) through the use of "skins". Look forward to that! Your memories of the old movies won't be debased--remember, you'll always have Paris.
The NYT article said that the customer disputed payment and CITIBANK froze payment.
Payment was then made. The customer called CITIBANK. CITIBANK told her that the hold had been taken away by the customer.
The woman said she didn't do that.
CITIBANK said that that's not their problem.
If this isn't an outrage, I don't know what is. I will never hold a CITIBANK card.
Wait!
". . .robbed him of the money to defend the charges." ???
The account that was frozen was an account SUPPOSEDLY used for Wikileaks donations. If I'm a donor and my Wikileaks donation goes to Assange's rape defense fund, I'm mighty angry.
The documents were taken by a private first class in the US Army. They were not that secure in the FIRST place. Any country with a halfway decent spy service has almost certainly already taken them.
I would also suspect that those documents contain disinformation precisely because they were so poorly secured.
This knowledge is already out there. The outrage et cetera is being manipulated.
This is such a circus.
There is no reason to suppose that people would not ally themselves with an artificial brain. People have already aligned themselves with Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Adolf Hitler, and Josef Stalin--allegiances with undisputedly bad people who ultimately served them very poorly. There is every reason to expect that people will form an allegiance to an artificial brain if that artificial brain causes those people to receive adequate food, shelter, and medical care.
That will be seriously weird. I can envision elections to appoint protectors of the artificial brain. If the military gets what it wants from the artificial brain, it will protect the artificial brain (and let the wars begin). The Artificial Brain will be able to forge shifting alliances with human groups that ensure its continued existence in power.
Imagine multiple corporations amassing ever more power as a consequence of direction by a superior artificial brain. That power is political power and it translates to control over people.
I WANT ASIMOV'S THREE RULES!!!!! This is scary!
Have you EVER heard of Huey Long?