Oh but actually, they could screw you in other ways. Ford could weld the hood shut and make up a contract with the sale of every car that no one but a licensed Ford mechanic can service the car, and all knowledge of parts is under NDA, and parts on the street are illegal (pirate) parts, and so on.
They could also Lexmark you by having the parts 'expire' at certain times, requiring you to get the car serviced. Of course you won't know which part 'expired' because of the NDA and the DMCA that's preventing online distribution of the information, etc.
[populus Romanus] qui dabat olim imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se continet atque duas tantum res anxius optat, PANEM ET CIRCENSES"
"The people who had once bestowed commands, consulships, legions, and all else now longs eagerly for just two things, bread and circus games." - Juvenal
There's just one small problem with your reasoning: crime in schools has dropped dramatically in the wake of zero tolerance laws. Kids are no longer allowed to steal or beat each other up.
I wouldn't trade that kind of protection for anything in the world.
You have basically argued that children do not have property rights, and this is exactly why America has the juvenile disciplinary problems we have today.
You either have property rights, or you don't. You're arguing the utterly unstable "some of the time" point of view.
It's the mentality of people like you that is responsible for kids getting completely out of control in school with theft, assault and battery, and even sexual assault. Because "boys will be boys".
The heyday of that ignorance pretty much jumped the shark after Columbine, didn't it? I bet you forgot that nowadays, American schools have begun to adopt a Zero Tolerance policy that calls for suspension, and expulsion, for this kind of behavior. Which is a good thing. Stop making excuses, and start hanging 'em by their balls. Okay, so hanging by the balls is unconstitutional - but if they want to start out a life of crime early on, then let's introduce them to the proper punishments for crime.
If we started punishing these thieves as thieves, instead of "kids", at an early age, they will learn right quick to stop, or they'll be Darwinized. Furthermore, allowing their parents to be held liable the same way as when kids steal from stores.
After reading all your excuses, all I can say is, "Thank God for zero tolerance laws."
I say we need more crackdowns. Lock those schools down, hard. We'll send YOUR kids to the "boys will be boys" school districts, and when your kid winds up pummeled to death by boys who are being boys, don't come crying to me.
My kids will grow up in a school that concentrates hard on personal safety and property rights, instead of coddling the thieves and thugs that contribute to America having the highest crime rate in the industrialized world.
Oh yeah, and at least I did grow up. I don't think your kids will survive.
Whatever. You people are so abysmally stupid that I have to draw a diagram for you.
Stealing a $5 tape from a store = shoplifting Stealing a $5 tape from a kid = ?
Either people have rights or they don't.
This is not maneuvering. You have no argument except that kids do not have rights, but everyone else does. The analogy is exactly similar and there are no differences.
You either have property rights, or you don't. Does anyone have an argument against that? a) Was this tape not his property? b) Was it not taken without his consent? c) What is the definition of taking something from someone without their consent?
I really HATE people like you who deny the facts until your face turns blue. You're more obtuse than the Creationists!
Okay, I dare you to put your theory to the test. Go to Wal Mart and slip one blank videotape into your coat and walk out, and see if they look at it as "no consequence".
If, for some insane and boneheaded reason, they arrest you, be sure to argue in court "It's of no consequence unless I make a habit of it."
I'm sure the system will have some sense of perspective, eh?
Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo If a 14 year old steals a $5 video tape from a store, is that of no consequence? Why is it not the same thing when you steal from a person?
And why then does the RIAA get to send people to prison and sue them for up to $750,000 for stealing a $0 mp3?
I'd like to limit this to just the most gaping inconsistencies that a class M star can pass through, so I'll stop now.
I'm amazed at how the RIAA can claim theft on the non-theft of virtual items, but the real life stealing of someone's stuff isn't defined as theft if it's done by kids to other kids.
Of course, if a kid went in and stole something from a convenience store, he'd go down for shoplifting.
Again, not so for stealing from another kid.
DOES CANADA (and the US) HAVE FUCKED UP CRIMINAL LAWS?
Not negotiable. I have an AGP video card; and for PCI: a video capture card (ATI video capture features don't have Linux driver support), a sound card (no onboard audio, and even if there was onboard audio, my Audigy beats anything onboard), a network card, a Firewire/USB2 combo card, and a SCSI card. All five of my PCI slots are used.
So, which way should I severely cripple my PC and lose oft-used functionality? Should I lose the SCSI cd-rw's and switch to EIDE (and thus lose my EIDE hard drives)? Should I lose my USB cams and thumb drives? Or put 'em on the superslow USB1 port? And give up future USB2/Firewire functionality? Should I lose my sound card and perhaps get a motherboard with an inferior onboard DSP? Should I lose my NIC and kiss my DSL speed goodbye? Should I knock off the video capture so I can't watch TV on my computer screen or capture video?
It was me who put in the blackmailing part (the stupid site messed up my Blockquote tags so the two sets of quotes look all enmeshed! Damn!!)
Our governments need to listen to principles more than what is 'pragmatic' (i.e. "profitable for the powers that be"). But then again we also need to re-think our ethics which give all the concern to the people on top at the expense of everyone on the bottom who support the ones up on top.
The Register said (at http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/31472.html): It is politicians who make the law, and it is politicians who need to be persuaded if the law is to move in the direction that you desire it to. But while they are a peculiar and varied breed, there are three things you can be fairly certain will not hold much sway with them:
1. Ideological argument. Politicians are nothing if not pragmatic. Their very survival is based on seeing which way the wind is blowing and adjusting accordingly
2. Little-man defence. Politicians will not risk upsetting rich and powerful people and companies unless there is a principle at stake: that principle being that the government ultimately decides. Therefore arguing a point on the basis that it will restrict or impair a powerful body is counterproductive
3. Criticism. Politicians do not respond well to criticism. In fact, the more they get, the more stubborn they become. Flattery is the surest route to their heart, and this means making them feel important. Wining and dining, listening, applauding their insight and then putting your point across
1) That means profits over politics. The Open Source movement should have found some weapon to blackmail politicians into not allowing these new patent law changes to pass. For instance: "If you pass these laws these particular (thousands of) businesses will flee Europe and go elsewhere and take hundreds of thousands of jobs with them."
2) Tyranny of the few is still as true now as it has ever been. Hello, feudalism! Er, welcome back. Er, feudalism never really left!
3) Long live sycophantry!
We need less 'irony'ism and apathy, and more hard core fanaticism in this society.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh fuck, what's the number? I'm doing that RIGHT NOW if their service lines are up at night!!!
except apparently it can't happen in the states YET.
c id=6658 353 :(
I said it right here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=74169&
Oh but actually, they could screw you in other ways. Ford could weld the hood shut and make up a contract with the sale of every car that no one but a licensed Ford mechanic can service the car, and all knowledge of parts is under NDA, and parts on the street are illegal (pirate) parts, and so on.
They could also Lexmark you by having the parts 'expire' at certain times, requiring you to get the car serviced. Of course you won't know which part 'expired' because of the NDA and the DMCA that's preventing online distribution of the information, etc.
[populus Romanus] qui dabat olim imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se continet atque duas tantum res anxius optat, PANEM ET CIRCENSES"
"The people who had once bestowed commands, consulships, legions, and all else now longs eagerly for just two things, bread and circus games."
- Juvenal
Terrorists! They're everywhere!
eh, except for your gas tank.
TAKE THE RED PILL!!!
5)
no no no no!!!!
It's more like
5) "Is XXX here?"
"No, XXX is in court on trial for the stalking and brutal axe murder of a telemarketer."
There's just one small problem with your reasoning: crime in schools has dropped dramatically in the wake of zero tolerance laws. Kids are no longer allowed to steal or beat each other up.
I wouldn't trade that kind of protection for anything in the world.
You have basically argued that children do not have property rights, and this is exactly why America has the juvenile disciplinary problems we have today.
You either have property rights, or you don't. You're arguing the utterly unstable "some of the time" point of view.
It's the mentality of people like you that is responsible for kids getting completely out of control in school with theft, assault and battery, and even sexual assault. Because "boys will be boys".
The heyday of that ignorance pretty much jumped the shark after Columbine, didn't it? I bet you forgot that nowadays, American schools have begun to adopt a Zero Tolerance policy that calls for suspension, and expulsion, for this kind of behavior. Which is a good thing. Stop making excuses, and start hanging 'em by their balls. Okay, so hanging by the balls is unconstitutional - but if they want to start out a life of crime early on, then let's introduce them to the proper punishments for crime.
If we started punishing these thieves as thieves, instead of "kids", at an early age, they will learn right quick to stop, or they'll be Darwinized. Furthermore, allowing their parents to be held liable the same way as when kids steal from stores.
After reading all your excuses, all I can say is, "Thank God for zero tolerance laws."
I say we need more crackdowns. Lock those schools down, hard. We'll send YOUR kids to the "boys will be boys" school districts, and when your kid winds up pummeled to death by boys who are being boys, don't come crying to me.
My kids will grow up in a school that concentrates hard on personal safety and property rights, instead of coddling the thieves and thugs that contribute to America having the highest crime rate in the industrialized world.
Oh yeah, and at least I did grow up. I don't think your kids will survive.
Whatever. You people are so abysmally stupid that I have to draw a diagram for you.
Stealing a $5 tape from a store = shoplifting
Stealing a $5 tape from a kid = ?
Either people have rights or they don't.
This is not maneuvering. You have no argument except that kids do not have rights, but everyone else does. The analogy is exactly similar and there are no differences.
You either have property rights, or you don't. Does anyone have an argument against that?
a) Was this tape not his property?
b) Was it not taken without his consent?
c) What is the definition of taking something from someone without their consent?
I really HATE people like you who deny the facts until your face turns blue. You're more obtuse than the Creationists!
Weak. You know full well that if you were to steal a video tape from a store, you'd have to answer to the cops.
Okay, I dare you to put your theory to the test. Go to Wal Mart and slip one blank videotape into your coat and walk out, and see if they look at it as "no consequence".
If, for some insane and boneheaded reason, they arrest you, be sure to argue in court "It's of no consequence unless I make a habit of it."
I'm sure the system will have some sense of perspective, eh?
Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
If a 14 year old steals a $5 video tape from a store, is that of no consequence? Why is it not the same thing when you steal from a person?
And why then does the RIAA get to send people to prison and sue them for up to $750,000 for stealing a $0 mp3?
I'd like to limit this to just the most gaping inconsistencies that a class M star can pass through, so I'll stop now.
They stole his video. That's theft, my man.
Do you believe theft should be illegal or not?
They stole the kid's video. That's called theft.
I assume Canada has laws against theft, right?
I'm amazed at how the RIAA can claim theft on the non-theft of virtual items, but the real life stealing of someone's stuff isn't defined as theft if it's done by kids to other kids.
Of course, if a kid went in and stole something from a convenience store, he'd go down for shoplifting.
Again, not so for stealing from another kid.
DOES CANADA (and the US) HAVE FUCKED UP CRIMINAL LAWS?
YES, THEY DO!!!
Which will get me a higher sentence?!
Sheesh.
It's copying a damned mp3, not bank robbery.
Genie comes from the word Djinn, or Jinn.
They're a pretty nasty race, actually, and have been kiddified for modern culture. Their real purpose is best described in the movie "Wishmaster".
HTH
All the MMORPG players who take the Red Pill? :)
I'm gonna have a transmitter on me so that whenever someone points their mobile phone at me, it'll say "Take the red pill". :)
And other pro-user software (ad-aware, etc.) that interfere with sites like this.
Gator argues that "consumers own their desktops", which is actually right.
If this ruling stands, there'll be no way to successfully sue the makers of software like Ad Aware or Junkbusters.
All your trust are belong to us!
- MicroSoft
Not negotiable.
I have an AGP video card; and for PCI: a video capture card (ATI video capture features don't have Linux driver support), a sound card (no onboard audio, and even if there was onboard audio, my Audigy beats anything onboard), a network card, a Firewire/USB2 combo card, and a SCSI card. All five of my PCI slots are used.
So, which way should I severely cripple my PC and lose oft-used functionality?
Should I lose the SCSI cd-rw's and switch to EIDE (and thus lose my EIDE hard drives)?
Should I lose my USB cams and thumb drives? Or put 'em on the superslow USB1 port? And give up future USB2/Firewire functionality?
Should I lose my sound card and perhaps get a motherboard with an inferior onboard DSP?
Should I lose my NIC and kiss my DSL speed goodbye?
Should I knock off the video capture so I can't watch TV on my computer screen or capture video?
Help me out here...
It was me who put in the blackmailing part (the stupid site messed up my Blockquote tags so the two sets of quotes look all enmeshed! Damn!!)
Our governments need to listen to principles more than what is 'pragmatic' (i.e. "profitable for the powers that be"). But then again we also need to re-think our ethics which give all the concern to the people on top at the expense of everyone on the bottom who support the ones up on top.
The Register said (at http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/31472.html) :
It is politicians who make the law, and it is politicians who need to be persuaded if the law is to move in the direction that you desire it to. But while they are a peculiar and varied breed, there are three things you can be fairly certain will not hold much sway with them:
1. Ideological argument. Politicians are nothing if not pragmatic. Their very survival is based on seeing which way the wind is blowing and adjusting accordingly
2. Little-man defence. Politicians will not risk upsetting rich and powerful people and companies unless there is a principle at stake: that principle being that the government ultimately decides. Therefore arguing a point on the basis that it will restrict or impair a powerful body is counterproductive
3. Criticism. Politicians do not respond well to criticism. In fact, the more they get, the more stubborn they become. Flattery is the surest route to their heart, and this means making them feel important. Wining and dining, listening, applauding their insight and then putting your point across
1) That means profits over politics. The Open Source movement should have found some weapon to blackmail politicians into not allowing these new patent law changes to pass. For instance: "If you pass these laws these particular (thousands of) businesses will flee Europe and go elsewhere and take hundreds of thousands of jobs with them."
2) Tyranny of the few is still as true now as it has ever been. Hello, feudalism! Er, welcome back. Er, feudalism never really left!
3) Long live sycophantry!
We need less 'irony'ism and apathy, and more hard core fanaticism in this society.
LOL... ignorance is bliss.