As the AC pointed out, I was partially incorrect. Glock did indeed sue someone for killing with their handguns, but it was in LA, not New York. I quote from my source:
"LOS ANGELES - Glock Inc., a maker of guns, is suing Buford O. Furrow, the
white supremacist charged with killing a postman and wounding five people
at a Jewish community center last year.
The suit, filed Wednesday, claims that Furrow used Glock's product in an
illegal fashion and should share some responsibility for the negative
attention Glock and other guns makers are receiving because of the Aug.
10, 1999 shootings. It seeks unspecified damages."
Solid water (or rather, ice) is actually MORE voluminous than luquid water. I don't recall why, but you can test it for yourself. Get one cc of water, and freeze that puppy. It will be larger in its frozen state.
I don't like Anime and I don't like CGI. The only good animation is Disney. Well, that's pretty ironic, seeing as pretty much EVERY SINGLE disney movie to come out in the past 3 years has had gobs of CGI all over it. Remember the marauding mongol hordes in Mulan? Yup. Those were CGI. Even the Lion King had CGI.
Animation is not about the fucking drawing. It's about the story. That's where Disney will stomp a mudhole in those japs anyday. Yeah, after all, who cares about what gives a person an identity, or what exactly IS a person's identity (see: Ghost In The Shell). I just wanna know if the cute fuzzy animal (that I happen to be consuming) is gonna get away from the big bad MAN HUNTER! oh boy.
But back to my point. No, seriously, you had a "point"?
They're real Americans. Not wanna be arthouse, coffee slurping fags. Translation: My freinds are REAL AMERICANS(tm)! They all watch football like we have actually something to do with the sport, watch MTV, are homophobic, xenophobic, have an IQ that's only slightly greater than their shoe size, and we drink beer and eat pork rinds!
Just for clarity, I am an American, but fucking idiots like this are what make everyone else on the planet biased against me because of where I'm from.
It's actually annoyingly complex math, figuring out where all the money goes to. Actually, most of it goes to the record companies (which I'm sure you've heard thousands of times). The artist's royalties never change. Now, you seem to think that I said artists are losing money NOW, which in some cases is true, while others is isn't. However, what I ACTUALLY said was that artists in general will make less money because they'll never get the initial push from the multimillion dollar record companies. I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE music. I listen every day, and have a very extensive collection. However, in order for musicians to become popular w/o record companies, they may have to actually *gasp* work for a number of years to get the startup money. The process will be much slower, but there'll be the probably even more really good artists.
However, as we both know, this will never happen. The Record companies will maintain their stranglehold on the market, and we'll all be forced to take regular doses of Brittney Spears and Backstreet Boys intraveinously by the time we're 70.
This probably made no sense, but I'm tired, so oh well.
No, it's not. If it were based on social contract, we would use NO money and recieve items on a "need" basis, which would be insufferably boring (read: suck):).
So, no, it's not like the copyright laws (which aren't based on social contract either, rather government enforced/controlled distribution)
You didn't read the message, did you? The question was not about theft of garbage, but piracy of music (though the 2 may often be confused:). I was pointing out flaws in ludicrous laws.
Alright then. Duplicate some "fucking money". It's more difficult than you may think. And you should probably ask your parents before you use their computer...
OK. Give me all your money, and I'll give you all my music.
You shouldn't use hyperboles unless you can stand to them:)
Oh, and when people have less money, they have LOST money, wheather that be via theft, spending, whatever. They have still lost money (and therefore, have less - or, "smaller piles")
Music is not a tangeable or unique item. It can be easily manipulated or duplicated.
Just for kicks, imagine a worker in a record store (who does not own any of the CD's he is selling... he's just a clerk), copies a CD. His company realizes this, fires him, and takes the CD from him (assuming it was on company media, using company computers). The company owners don't want the CD, so they throw it away. who owns the CD? If someone were to stroll by, could they pick it up and keep it? Are we no longer allowed to take things others throw away? If they do take it, would that be piracy, and if so, who is guilty?
Now, my point is, claiming that something easily transferable, yet nontangable in essence is "property" that can be owned is a fallacy. The fact that there is a multi billion dollar industry built upon it is unfortunate, but that's no reason to stop, well, reason. It's an evil allowed by another evil.
Conclusion: Basically, some insanely rich people will lose some of their money (which they acquired through an "evil"), and some other less talented people will have to choose actual professions. boo hoo.
Loss of quality results when passing through ANYTHING. Try it out for yourself. Get some good speakers, a pair of cables that's 60 feet, connect them to your amp, and listen. Then, try the same thing with a 2 foot cable. there is a very noticable degredation in quality.
In response to your second point, you ARE losing information (called packet loss). It's just not enough to really make a difference.
Damn! What are you moderators on (hint: see subject)??? While this post may not have been exceptionally funny, he wasn't doing anything wrong! Hell, he should have gotten some credit for not first posting or talking about the penis bird...
I think his point was, there would be no way for the aliens to determine if it was simultaneous or not. Weather there is some absoulte timing or not is irrevelant. The book essentially throws relativity out the window. Unless, of course, the aliens were occupying the same exact space at the same exact time. It seems improbable that the aliens would survive that, though:).
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Re:numbers explaining god...
on
Calculating God
·
· Score: 1
"Viewed in this context, "unexplainable" things detract from the "proof" of existence of god. Unless of course you believe that the abnormalities are either
1) actually part of the pattern created, and we just cant see how yet."
So, basically, he's saying "If I'm wrong, I'm not really because I can indefinitely delay any challenge!"
Translation: I don't want to think! I hate having my ideals challenged, because when people ask questions concerning what I believe and I can't answer them, I feel all icky and worthless! Shame on you for attempting to make me use rational thought!
Hmm. I don't think so. You cannot have "designer kids" because the children that are given to you fall under the realm of God, not the Human Genome Project. Sorry if this bothers you, but truth is truth. -AC (post 618)
Are we talking about the same slashdot? Creationists (as usual) will get some legislation passed that prevents the people who think it's ok from doing it. Yay. more wasted technology (brought to you by pushy parents and over litigation).
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Re:Why shouldn't I be able to have designer kids?
on
Frankenstein Time
·
· Score: 1
*smack* Stop talking.
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Re:Why shouldn't I be able to have designer kids?
on
Frankenstein Time
·
· Score: 1
um. ok. if we can create the "perfect race" without killing anyone, what's the problem? Hitler may have wanted that, but his methods were vastly different. If he tried to without killing anyone, there wouldn't have been such a fuss.
Just because "hitler wanted it", dosen't mean it's bad. Hitler may have also liked cheese, but that dosen't mean I don't like it.
Isn't the RIAA actually violating the British Telecom patent about hyperlinking???
Not really. In fact, they (the RIAA) probably wouldn't mind if that holds up. They have the money to pay any liscencing fees, and it would futher assist their crusade against distribution of copyrighted material.
Slashdot Mirror
yes, this is one of such obstructions.
I personally like the bit about how "lawful web users have nothing to fear", or something to that effect.
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
*sigh* :)
moderation points wasted. That was damn funny
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
As the AC pointed out, I was partially incorrect. Glock did indeed sue someone for killing with their handguns, but it was in LA, not New York. I quote from my source:
"LOS ANGELES - Glock Inc., a maker of guns, is suing Buford O. Furrow, the white supremacist charged with killing a postman and wounding five people at a Jewish community center last year.
The suit, filed Wednesday, claims that Furrow used Glock's product in an illegal fashion and should share some responsibility for the negative attention Glock and other guns makers are receiving because of the Aug. 10, 1999 shootings. It seeks unspecified damages."
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
It was actually Glock.
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
"...water vapor emissions from said SUVs."
Yeah, gotta watch those water vapor emissions. Now, please excuse me while I die laughing.
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Solid water (or rather, ice) is actually MORE voluminous than luquid water. I don't recall why, but you can test it for yourself. Get one cc of water, and freeze that puppy. It will be larger in its frozen state.
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Yup. This guy's an American all right!
I don't like Anime and I don't like CGI. The only good animation is Disney.
Well, that's pretty ironic, seeing as pretty much EVERY SINGLE disney movie to come out in the past 3 years has had gobs of CGI all over it. Remember the marauding mongol hordes in Mulan? Yup. Those were CGI. Even the Lion King had CGI.
Animation is not about the fucking drawing. It's about the story. That's where Disney will stomp a mudhole in those japs anyday.
Yeah, after all, who cares about what gives a person an identity, or what exactly IS a person's identity (see: Ghost In The Shell). I just wanna know if the cute fuzzy animal (that I happen to be consuming) is gonna get away from the big bad MAN HUNTER! oh boy.
But back to my point.
No, seriously, you had a "point"?
They're real Americans. Not wanna be arthouse, coffee slurping fags.
Translation: My freinds are REAL AMERICANS(tm)! They all watch football like we have actually something to do with the sport, watch MTV, are homophobic, xenophobic, have an IQ that's only slightly greater than their shoe size, and we drink beer and eat pork rinds!
Just for clarity, I am an American, but fucking idiots like this are what make everyone else on the planet biased against me because of where I'm from.
-SaintAlex (/slugsalt)
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Because I can't. I download everything off napster, of course. I mean, who actually OWNS the CD if they have mp3's, huh???
That was sarcasm, for the inordinarily slow.
saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
It's actually annoyingly complex math, figuring out where all the money goes to. Actually, most of it goes to the record companies (which I'm sure you've heard thousands of times). The artist's royalties never change.
Now, you seem to think that I said artists are losing money NOW, which in some cases is true, while others is isn't. However, what I ACTUALLY said was that artists in general will make less money because they'll never get the initial push from the multimillion dollar record companies.
I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE music. I listen every day, and have a very extensive collection.
However, in order for musicians to become popular w/o record companies, they may have to actually *gasp* work for a number of years to get the startup money. The process will be much slower, but there'll be the probably even more really good artists.
However, as we both know, this will never happen. The Record companies will maintain their stranglehold on the market, and we'll all be forced to take regular doses of Brittney Spears and Backstreet Boys intraveinously by the time we're 70.
This probably made no sense, but I'm tired, so oh well.
saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
No, it's not. If it were based on social contract, we would use NO money and recieve items on a "need" basis, which would be insufferably boring (read: suck) :).
So, no, it's not like the copyright laws (which aren't based on social contract either, rather government enforced/controlled distribution)
Observe, reason, and experiment.
You didn't read the message, did you? :). I was pointing out flaws in ludicrous laws.
The question was not about theft of garbage, but piracy of music (though the 2 may often be confused
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Alright then. Duplicate some "fucking money". It's more difficult than you may think.
And you should probably ask your parents before you use their computer...
saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
OK. Give me all your money, and I'll give you all my music.
:)
You shouldn't use hyperboles unless you can stand to them
Oh, and when people have less money, they have LOST money, wheather that be via theft, spending, whatever. They have still lost money (and therefore, have less - or, "smaller piles")
saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
So, when someone takes something from the trash they're stealing from the state? :)
Rock! heh heh
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Music is not a tangeable or unique item. It can be easily manipulated or duplicated.
Just for kicks, imagine a worker in a record store (who does not own any of the CD's he is selling... he's just a clerk), copies a CD. His company realizes this, fires him, and takes the CD from him (assuming it was on company media, using company computers). The company owners don't want the CD, so they throw it away.
who owns the CD? If someone were to stroll by, could they pick it up and keep it? Are we no longer allowed to take things others throw away? If they do take it, would that be piracy, and if so, who is guilty?
Now, my point is, claiming that something easily transferable, yet nontangable in essence is "property" that can be owned is a fallacy. The fact that there is a multi billion dollar industry built upon it is unfortunate, but that's no reason to stop, well, reason. It's an evil allowed by another evil.
Conclusion:
Basically, some insanely rich people will lose some of their money (which they acquired through an "evil"), and some other less talented people will have to choose actual professions. boo hoo.
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Loss of quality results when passing through ANYTHING. Try it out for yourself. Get some good speakers, a pair of cables that's 60 feet, connect them to your amp, and listen. Then, try the same thing with a 2 foot cable. there is a very noticable degredation in quality.
In response to your second point, you ARE losing information (called packet loss). It's just not enough to really make a difference.
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Damn! What are you moderators on (hint: see subject)??? While this post may not have been exceptionally funny, he wasn't doing anything wrong!
Hell, he should have gotten some credit for not first posting or talking about the penis bird...
-saintalex.(watch me get modded...)
Observe, reason, and experiment.
I think his point was, there would be no way for the aliens to determine if it was simultaneous or not. Weather there is some absoulte timing or not is irrevelant. The book essentially throws relativity out the window. :).
Unless, of course, the aliens were occupying the same exact space at the same exact time. It seems improbable that the aliens would survive that, though
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
"Viewed in this context, "unexplainable" things detract from the "proof" of existence of god. Unless of course you believe that the abnormalities are either
1) actually part of the pattern created, and we just cant see how yet."
So, basically, he's saying "If I'm wrong, I'm not really because I can indefinitely delay any challenge!"
Wonderful.
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Translation:
I don't want to think! I hate having my ideals challenged, because when people ask questions concerning what I believe and I can't answer them, I feel all icky and worthless!
Shame on you for attempting to make me use rational thought!
*thwop*
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
"It is usually a reduction to decrease complexity..."
That sounds like intentional misquotation to me.
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Hmm. I don't think so.
You cannot have "designer kids" because the children that are given to you fall under the realm of God, not the Human Genome Project. Sorry if this bothers you, but truth is truth.
-AC (post 618)
Are we talking about the same slashdot? Creationists (as usual) will get some legislation passed that prevents the people who think it's ok from doing it. Yay. more wasted technology (brought to you by pushy parents and over litigation).
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
*smack*
Stop talking.
Observe, reason, and experiment.
um. ok. if we can create the "perfect race" without killing anyone, what's the problem? Hitler may have wanted that, but his methods were vastly different. If he tried to without killing anyone, there wouldn't have been such a fuss.
Just because "hitler wanted it", dosen't mean it's bad. Hitler may have also liked cheese, but that dosen't mean I don't like it.
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Isn't the RIAA actually violating the British Telecom patent about hyperlinking???
Not really. In fact, they (the RIAA) probably wouldn't mind if that holds up. They have the money to pay any liscencing fees, and it would futher assist their crusade against distribution of copyrighted material.
Observe, reason, and experiment.