The whole world needs to grow up instead of looking for a scape goat.
To my mind, vastly more energy and money should be put into educating everyone to the edge of their capacity. It's simply not feasible to have a 'select' (largely self-selected) few dictate the rules to the rest of us and fail laughably to police them. Everyone needs to be self-policing.
Would true universality of opportunity eliminate the 'need' for cruelty and excessive greed or are these facets of some the humans' character which are unconnected with personal / group need ?
Aren't we all sick and tired of someone-in-power trying to make one-size-fits-all rules ?
Personally, I like to snipe from a safe distance in cod5 but have no desire to injure someone in real life.
How about we make things we consider to be 'bad' (e.g. murder, acts of physical violence etc) illegal and then allow people to MANAGE THEMSELVES in whatever seems appropriate, based on their own experience of their personal inner-worlds, so that they do not commit the actual acts. It's no good trying to consider every possible precondition in this way and making those illegal too.
Let's ban milk; every rapist ate a bowl of cereal on the morning of their crimes; therefore milk must go!
Whilst I'm on a rant.. how about we place a ban on stupid people being elected to office? Why the hell should some guy who can't understand the b asics of the subject he's making laws around be allowed to do so, 'on our behalf' ?
Maybe someone with a bit of cash to throw around behind the scenes of government, perhaps someone with an investment in the movie industry isn't happy about the gradual erosion of movie-spend in favour of game-spend ?
But there's more than just intelligence and competence needed to be a good president.
Of course by use of the term 'good president', I probably evoke many different ideas, depending on the reader.
What *should* a president be doing? Is it tough love to fuck over most of the country to allow some american individuals to become so wealthy that they have personal fortunes totalling GDP of twenty countries? Or should every citizen's needs be catered for - to bring into being the ideals found within your constitution?
Is it just me or is something broken with slashdot's 'read the rest of this comment' feature? i.e. why did I need to scroll through fifteen pages of gayness (tm) to find the link which, when clicked, shows no more content ?
till then I am for damaging the strength of copyright law in any possible way, including making completely impossible to enforce on a technical level such that everyone is a violator and the entire concept becomes a sad joke.
Quoting unknown author who wrote this in the spirit of MEIHEM IN CE CLASRUM, by Dolton Edwards.
I'm failing to find the original text. Ironically, there seems to be variation in the spelling of both "MEIHEM IN CE CLASRUM" and "Dolton Edwards", which isn't helping me, someone who's heard of neither phrase before:D
I am confused now... Who is right and who is wrong?
They're all wrong. Contrary to popular belief, history is nonsense. We can't use it to learn to avoid future mistakes because noone can agree what actually happened; either through lack of information or deliberate re-writing of history.
In my opinion, we should avoid constantly re-hashing the disputes about who's most correct on the subject of what happened n years ago and concentrate on trying to come to a collective agreement on what kind of world we want to live in.
Looks to me as though the only troll in this part of the discussion is you.
Feel free to challenge the GP's statements you feel are in error. Help the rest of us see how we're being misled. Can't? Simply say it's BS then and leave it at that.
I'm no linguist but it seems that the idea of most letters being unpronounced is due to laziness on the part of the speaker.
For example, Library is often pronounced Libry so pretty soon we should spell it that way too? Hey, why not. Then, a few years down the road when Libry is the official spelling, why bother pronouncing the B, etc etc etc..
Pretty soon all words are spelt the same and we're all grunting in the spoken-language cousin of Brainfuck.
Oh. It seemed to me that you meant that at the exact instant before the nerd's decision to download, they 'victim' has no information as to whether the nerd is interested in becoming a customer:
(a) they are
(b) they aren't
so in that sense there are hypothetical profits in the pipeline.
i.e. it's the lack of information about the nerd's and in fact all current non-customers' desire to be a customer, without consideration of downloading, that leads to uncertainty.
Of the two possible ways this uncertainty could resolve itself, only a) is measurable by the 'victim' and it's measureable, even after they've downloaded it 'illegally' - at the point where the purchase occurs.
Immediately after the decision to download, an extra level of uncertainty is introduced, so at that point the victim may consider themselves to be unsure as to wether they are out some hypothetical sale or whether their hypothetical sale may translate across two levels of uncertainty into an actual sale.
-- My point seems (:) to be that (b) isn't measurable by the hypothetical victim regardless of whether downloading occurs, so it's pointless to even consider downloading as being a factor.
One of the participants in the goodcopybadcopy documentary is a by-night DJ called girltalk. I encourage you to trawl your favourite torrent site for some of his work...
...but you are out of some hypothetical future profits.
Not necessarily. Some people probably downloaded _then_ buy.
So, in that case, does a problem still exist? No hypothetical future profits have been lost. No tangible damage has been done by the actual infringement.
Of course the hypothetical future profits may, in an alternate case, disappear from the timeline the instant the downloader hears the music due to it not suiting their musical taste. In this case, should we be focusing on the infringement or the unsatisfying musical qualities present within the recording?
How are they gonna whip the people up into a state where they support all sorts of crazy invasions and so on, if they portray 'the enemy' in a respectful light?
Slashdot Mirror
It's a life-sized gay-looking optional mascot/adornment for trans ams... much favoured by germans, apparently.
To my mind, vastly more energy and money should be put into educating everyone to the edge of their capacity. It's simply not feasible to have a 'select' (largely self-selected) few dictate the rules to the rest of us and fail laughably to police them. Everyone needs to be self-policing.
Would true universality of opportunity eliminate the 'need' for cruelty and excessive greed or are these facets of some the humans' character which are unconnected with personal / group need ?
Where would we be today if not for the master race? How many great videogames involve shooting nazis ?
Wolfenstein 3d ...
cod5
Warmongering neo-con ghoul detected...
Aren't we all sick and tired of someone-in-power trying to make one-size-fits-all rules ?
Personally, I like to snipe from a safe distance in cod5 but have no desire to injure someone in real life.
How about we make things we consider to be 'bad' (e.g. murder, acts of physical violence etc) illegal and then allow people to MANAGE THEMSELVES in whatever seems appropriate, based on their own experience of their personal inner-worlds, so that they do not commit the actual acts. It's no good trying to consider every possible precondition in this way and making those illegal too.
Let's ban milk; every rapist ate a bowl of cereal on the morning of their crimes; therefore milk must go!
Whilst I'm on a rant.. how about we place a ban on stupid people being elected to office? Why the hell should some guy who can't understand the b asics of the subject he's making laws around be allowed to do so, 'on our behalf' ?
I love a good conspiracy theory so...
Maybe someone with a bit of cash to throw around behind the scenes of government, perhaps someone with an investment in the movie industry isn't happy about the gradual erosion of movie-spend in favour of game-spend ?
But there's more than just intelligence and competence needed to be a good president.
Of course by use of the term 'good president', I probably evoke many different ideas, depending on the reader.
What *should* a president be doing? Is it tough love to fuck over most of the country to allow some american individuals to become so wealthy that they have personal fortunes totalling GDP of twenty countries? Or should every citizen's needs be catered for - to bring into being the ideals found within your constitution?
At least you partly benefit. Less of your tax dollars needed to fuck you over ;D
Is it just me or is something broken with slashdot's 'read the rest of this comment' feature? i.e. why did I need to scroll through fifteen pages of gayness (tm) to find the link which, when clicked, shows no more content ?
Uhh, isn't that where we're at right about now?
Traditionally, the stunt-double, when it comes to responsibility being assigned is Gary McKinnon.
I'm failing to find the original text. Ironically, there seems to be variation in the spelling of both "MEIHEM IN CE CLASRUM" and "Dolton Edwards", which isn't helping me, someone who's heard of neither phrase before :D
Perhaps this: http://www.angelfire.com/va3/timshenk/codes/meihem.html ?
They're all wrong. Contrary to popular belief, history is nonsense. We can't use it to learn to avoid future mistakes because noone can agree what actually happened; either through lack of information or deliberate re-writing of history.
In my opinion, we should avoid constantly re-hashing the disputes about who's most correct on the subject of what happened n years ago and concentrate on trying to come to a collective agreement on what kind of world we want to live in.
An AC called Atomic Rabbit ?
Looks to me as though the only troll in this part of the discussion is you.
Feel free to challenge the GP's statements you feel are in error. Help the rest of us see how we're being misled. Can't? Simply say it's BS then and leave it at that.
I'm no linguist but it seems that the idea of most letters being unpronounced is due to laziness on the part of the speaker.
For example, Library is often pronounced Libry so pretty soon we should spell it that way too? Hey, why not. Then, a few years down the road when Libry is the official spelling, why bother pronouncing the B, etc etc etc..
Pretty soon all words are spelt the same and we're all grunting in the spoken-language cousin of Brainfuck.
whoosh!
Oh. It seemed to me that you meant that at the exact instant before the nerd's decision to download, they 'victim' has no information as to whether the nerd is interested in becoming a customer:
(a) they are
(b) they aren't
so in that sense there are hypothetical profits in the pipeline.
i.e. it's the lack of information about the nerd's and in fact all current non-customers' desire to be a customer, without consideration of downloading, that leads to uncertainty.
Of the two possible ways this uncertainty could resolve itself, only a) is measurable by the 'victim' and it's measureable, even after they've downloaded it 'illegally' - at the point where the purchase occurs.
Immediately after the decision to download, an extra level of uncertainty is introduced, so at that point the victim may consider themselves to be unsure as to wether they are out some hypothetical sale or whether their hypothetical sale may translate across two levels of uncertainty into an actual sale.
--
My point seems (:) to be that (b) isn't measurable by the hypothetical victim regardless of whether downloading occurs, so it's pointless to even consider downloading as being a factor.
Ok, that was painful; sorry :D
Maybe you should book your flight now?
Shhh; let them go down with the ship...
Wait, that would be 'girl talk', the space matters.
One of the participants in the goodcopybadcopy documentary is a by-night DJ called girltalk. I encourage you to trawl your favourite torrent site for some of his work...
Yah but according to the bible, his Dad has the copyright on fish and bread and therefore probably licensed it to him at a family rate :D
Not necessarily. Some people probably downloaded _then_ buy.
So, in that case, does a problem still exist? No hypothetical future profits have been lost. No tangible damage has been done by the actual infringement.
Of course the hypothetical future profits may, in an alternate case, disappear from the timeline the instant the downloader hears the music due to it not suiting their musical taste. In this case, should we be focusing on the infringement or the unsatisfying musical qualities present within the recording?
That was pretty interesting.
Along the same lines is Steal This Film:
* http://www.stealthisfilm.com/Part2/download.php
Both Parts I and II available at the linked location.
How are they gonna whip the people up into a state where they support all sorts of crazy invasions and so on, if they portray 'the enemy' in a respectful light?