My rant was directed at notion that "modern" societies are more vulnerable simply because they use modern technology and require a lot of know-how to work logistically etc. These are issues that other features of being modern, namely interdependence, would take care off.
I specifically mentioned that this was only a minor aspect of the consequences of a massive nuclear strike. The political meltdown and the following power struggle you mention would probably be a much more important aspect.
I recognize your argument concerning modern societies' dependence on logistics and organization, but modern societies are also interdependent. If the US would be hit in a way which would kill of the know-how of how to run things, competence from other countries would likely compensate to an extent.
Take for example your issue with spare parts for cars. For many cars on US roads, spare parts are produced and stored in Japan and Europe. The companies with the logistical capacity are multinational and the expertise those companies hold in Japan and Europe would easily flow in and fill the gaps in the US. Thus, in the case of spare parts, the problem would be limited.
I realize this is a minor implication seeing the big picture of a massive nuclear strike, but my point is that the fact that the world is "modern" is not only a disadvantage as interdependence makes everything more robust. The internet in itself is probably a perfect analogy.
I don't know about that, I was merely pointing out the fact that the content industry together with judicial bodies around the world seem to believe that there can be no creativity or cultural creation without patents or copyright. Which, of course, might be due to the fact that copyright infringement and its punishment traces back to Genesis, as you points out.
As copyrights and patents are at the very core of human innovation - always has been, always will be - the Mars scenario you describes will result in there being no tech or cultural development. I thought this was common knowledge...
I'm from Sweden, you know, the opposite of the US. We have the exact same problem as you: we can't fire teachers and some pupils simply should be shot in the head - yet we do nothing about it.
Then again, together with a dozen other countries with similar characetistics, we have the highest standard of living in the world by any measure.
To sum up: The system as it is isn't perfect and there is probably plenty room for improvement. But be that as it may, we must not forget that the system is frigging awesome! It has higher quality and produces better results for the most people of any system ever employed by humanity. That's gotta count for something.
Incorrect. The IPRED law forces ISPs to hand out information connected to a certain IP address at a certain time. This is possible as ISPs log customer's assigned IP addresses together with time stamps. They do this as to be able to handle complaints, but it will be law to do it on behalf of law enforcement in the near future.
Well I happen to know for a fact that in many languages, if you can say it out loud as a word, it should be spelled with only the initial letter capitalised. English is however to bloated to find such well-defined rules.
I guess I know what you mean, but still. Communication is if not the number one at leat on the top three of threats against a government. Thus, one might expect the degree of democracy to be relative to the degree of regulated communication: Totalitarian regimes are likely to have no free communication, fully democratic regimes are likely to have totally free communication (I see no reason why a social-democratic regime couldn't have a phone line monopoly while still allowing free communication, it might even act as a gurantee)
I think the (very impressive) list of South American countries reflects this quite well.
Free as in..? The free as in beer brought by advertising happens at the cost of free as in freedom. Personally, I prefer a news network that is accountable to its readers rather than to advertisers, and I will gladly pay for it, but hey, maybe that's just me.
Besides, isn't AP already selling its content to non-owners, i.e. the non-US media?
His farewell letter ten years ago says nothing of his personality today, nor of his capability for doing the job, so at the end of the day it was you who lost out on thatone... Further, someone seeking a job does so for the oppertunity to supply the employer with a service, since it is the employer who is the one with an advertised need. Employers who fail to recognise this are generally assholes so, added to the fact that you lost out, I guess he was better off.
The album is available for preview on Spotify and Spotify is integrated with last.fm, so is it possible the 8000 last.fm users who listened to the tracks are perfectly legal Spotify users?
Well, I guess the accuracy for the survey you proposed would have to be higher than the ~95% provided by a sample of one thousand respondents, so no, it would not suffice. But most of all I guess it would undermine the people's trust in the election and the democrasy. This is because people are ignorant of statistic facts, as your post just proved.
The sample is not small but more than sufficient for the conclusion presented in the summary. The problem here seems to be that the data is old and that the sampling is probably not perfectly random. But as far as size is concerned, this is a large sample.
Agreed, it is troubling enough to disregard the results entirely. But I guess we already did that as the study is based on two years old data, practically excluding all mobile devices.
But to question the validity due to a sample size of 4600 is as mentioned not very educated. 1000 respondents will provide a satisfactory result no matter how large the population.
No, it's liberal. Which in a Swedish context (oughta be relevant in this case) would define it as right-wing. Over here, the dichotomy goes socialism vs. liberalism/conservatism whereas the US dichotomy goes liberalism/democrats vs. conservatism/republican.
As an interesting note to this, all of youth organisations of the seven parties in parliament, spanning left to right, is for legalising piracy.
Basically, in the scientific community at-large thinks you are full of shit, you are de-fact full of shit.
Although I'm siding with the researches here (one should always side with the researchers) what you're saying is wrong and dangerous. There's plenty of research on the subject, and I believe the general consensus among the scientific community at large agrees on the dangers of the literally mind boggling self-prevailing power of dominating discourses.
Slashdot Mirror
In Sweden, the charge is around $0.4 per transaction. I think.
My rant was directed at notion that "modern" societies are more vulnerable simply because they use modern technology and require a lot of know-how to work logistically etc. These are issues that other features of being modern, namely interdependence, would take care off.
I specifically mentioned that this was only a minor aspect of the consequences of a massive nuclear strike. The political meltdown and the following power struggle you mention would probably be a much more important aspect.
I recognize your argument concerning modern societies' dependence on logistics and organization, but modern societies are also interdependent. If the US would be hit in a way which would kill of the know-how of how to run things, competence from other countries would likely compensate to an extent.
Take for example your issue with spare parts for cars. For many cars on US roads, spare parts are produced and stored in Japan and Europe. The companies with the logistical capacity are multinational and the expertise those companies hold in Japan and Europe would easily flow in and fill the gaps in the US. Thus, in the case of spare parts, the problem would be limited.
I realize this is a minor implication seeing the big picture of a massive nuclear strike, but my point is that the fact that the world is "modern" is not only a disadvantage as interdependence makes everything more robust. The internet in itself is probably a perfect analogy.
Yes, because until now, Apple have never had similar issues with newly released products.
I don't know about that, I was merely pointing out the fact that the content industry together with judicial bodies around the world seem to believe that there can be no creativity or cultural creation without patents or copyright. Which, of course, might be due to the fact that copyright infringement and its punishment traces back to Genesis, as you points out.
As copyrights and patents are at the very core of human innovation - always has been, always will be - the Mars scenario you describes will result in there being no tech or cultural development. I thought this was common knowledge...
IT'S THE MOON. Jesus.
There is something rotten in the state of Sweden...
Well, that seems like something that would only occur ONCE :-)
That attitude is so 2008. Get with the times, or enjoy your backwardness together with the media mafia.
Yeah? Which country would that be?
I'm from Sweden, you know, the opposite of the US. We have the exact same problem as you: we can't fire teachers and some pupils simply should be shot in the head - yet we do nothing about it.
Then again, together with a dozen other countries with similar characetistics, we have the highest standard of living in the world by any measure.
To sum up: The system as it is isn't perfect and there is probably plenty room for improvement. But be that as it may, we must not forget that the system is frigging awesome! It has higher quality and produces better results for the most people of any system ever employed by humanity. That's gotta count for something.
Incorrect. The IPRED law forces ISPs to hand out information connected to a certain IP address at a certain time. This is possible as ISPs log customer's assigned IP addresses together with time stamps. They do this as to be able to handle complaints, but it will be law to do it on behalf of law enforcement in the near future.
Well I happen to know for a fact that in many languages, if you can say it out loud as a word, it should be spelled with only the initial letter capitalised. English is however to bloated to find such well-defined rules.
I guess I know what you mean, but still. Communication is if not the number one at leat on the top three of threats against a government. Thus, one might expect the degree of democracy to be relative to the degree of regulated communication: Totalitarian regimes are likely to have no free communication, fully democratic regimes are likely to have totally free communication (I see no reason why a social-democratic regime couldn't have a phone line monopoly while still allowing free communication, it might even act as a gurantee)
I think the (very impressive) list of South American countries reflects this quite well.
Free as in..? The free as in beer brought by advertising happens at the cost of free as in freedom. Personally, I prefer a news network that is accountable to its readers rather than to advertisers, and I will gladly pay for it, but hey, maybe that's just me.
Besides, isn't AP already selling its content to non-owners, i.e. the non-US media?
His farewell letter ten years ago says nothing of his personality today, nor of his capability for doing the job, so at the end of the day it was you who lost out on thatone... Further, someone seeking a job does so for the oppertunity to supply the employer with a service, since it is the employer who is the one with an advertised need. Employers who fail to recognise this are generally assholes so, added to the fact that you lost out, I guess he was better off.
The album is available for preview on Spotify and Spotify is integrated with last.fm, so is it possible the 8000 last.fm users who listened to the tracks are perfectly legal Spotify users?
30 years and counting
Well, I guess the accuracy for the survey you proposed would have to be higher than the ~95% provided by a sample of one thousand respondents, so no, it would not suffice. But most of all I guess it would undermine the people's trust in the election and the democrasy. This is because people are ignorant of statistic facts, as your post just proved.
The sample is not small but more than sufficient for the conclusion presented in the summary. The problem here seems to be that the data is old and that the sampling is probably not perfectly random. But as far as size is concerned, this is a large sample.
Agreed, it is troubling enough to disregard the results entirely. But I guess we already did that as the study is based on two years old data, practically excluding all mobile devices.
But to question the validity due to a sample size of 4600 is as mentioned not very educated. 1000 respondents will provide a satisfactory result no matter how large the population.
No, it's liberal. Which in a Swedish context (oughta be relevant in this case) would define it as right-wing. Over here, the dichotomy goes socialism vs. liberalism/conservatism whereas the US dichotomy goes liberalism/democrats vs. conservatism/republican.
As an interesting note to this, all of youth organisations of the seven parties in parliament, spanning left to right, is for legalising piracy.
a different approach by authorities, the record and movie industry to figure out a way to manage their income.
Funny, since I got my Spotify account, I seem to have lost interest in the bulk of pirated music on my hard drive...
I know, I was being funny. Or I wasn't, the fact was.
Basically, in the scientific community at-large thinks you are full of shit, you are de-fact full of shit.
Although I'm siding with the researches here (one should always side with the researchers) what you're saying is wrong and dangerous. There's plenty of research on the subject, and I believe the general consensus among the scientific community at large agrees on the dangers of the literally mind boggling self-prevailing power of dominating discourses.