"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Civilization cannot create networks without a Government. Better yet, they never have. Infrastructure has never existed without Government. What I say is a historical fact. Government did good by giving us the Internet. Historical fact. If you disagree, log off now. It's as simple as that.
And without Government, you would instead be under the control of your local warlord. Who would NOT allow you freedom of speech. Government does good by ensuring said warlord won't send thugs to snipe you dead from 500 yards for criticizing them.
That's two reasons why you're an idiot and why few people, if anyone, agrees with your retarded sig.
Just think about what you will do after you post your brain dead response: you will go back to living under a Government and most of all, you will like that Government and bend over for that Government and you will do it with a smile.
Otherwise you will move to a desert island and you will shut up.
Regarding your sig, I can name one time that Government did good.
Government enabled you to be able to criticize Government on a worldwide medium.
If you hate Government so much, then why not move to a desert island and build your own communications network?
This is but one way that you're perfectly happy to enjoy the benefits of Government while at the same time devaluing its very existence. No, I don't expect a reply from you cowardly Looneytarians.
So by your logic the society must act as one, it has to have a well defined path to non-destruction and respect of the future and so on and such. What if many many many people do not want to follow your logic, do not agree with it, don't care about it, hate it actually?
That's happening as we speak. Which is why Libertarianism can never happen: not many people follow your logic. You even have major dissent among the nerd crowd. Starting with me, of course.
At some point you will become frustrated that so many many many people are not with you on your set of issues. Will you then decide that they are lesser of human for not thinking the way you do?
You mean the way Libertarians consider their opposition "communists" or "statists" (translation: less than human).
Will you decide that they should be shown 'the light'? What if they reject your light? Will you decide to take them their even against their will? What if they resist?
On planet Libertaria, I can imagine that question being quite relevant when you Libertarians find yourselves confronted with a socialist counterculture. Yeehaw, get your thirty oughts we's goin for some target practice, yip yiiip!!
Will you decide that means justify the ends?
You mean, the ends justify the means?
Will you decide that it is OK to sacrifice some now, to build a better, new society later on?
I'd rather be sacrificed by a bullet to the head right quick, right now, than be one of the unlucky people in your paradise of greed and selfishness, one of the poor people who are sentenced to die slowly by starvation.
Oh and about all those weapons you keep talking about wanting the unrestricted right to having? I'm in favor of that, actually. Especially when the starving masses use them against you. Happens every time a "Libertaria" is founded. Oh wait, there has never been a Libertaria. It's nothing more than a myth.
Will you stop once you killed 1 person for your cause? 10 people? 1000 people? 1000000000 people? How many does it take? So called Communist regimes of our recent past and our current future have not hesitated, what makes you different?
Dead by a Communist's bullet, or dead by toxic waste, cancer, or simple starvation? Dead is still dead, whether it's by the malice of Communism or the utter negligence and apathy of Libertarianism.
Communism is the enemy of freedom; Libertarianism could lead to human extinction.
Your pathetic attempt at poking fun at Richard Stallman is duly noted.
If it weren't for him you'd be paying through the nose even more for every piece of software you use now.
Big business and free software are enemies - for every business that would LOVE to use software for free there's a company desperately hoping to make them pay for it. The GPL ensures that there is at least a balance partially in favor of everyone - businesses and citizens - using some software for free.
First of all, WHY WAS BLUEZHIFT MODDED DOWN??? Jeez. Corporations buy up patents and lock up competing technology all the time. Hello, electric cars?
Thyamine: That's why I feel nanobot therapy should be restricted to the hospital in a safe environment where bots can't be screwed up by outside energy.
Faylone: Why would this therapy damage your white blood cells?
"Hence the reason why we choose not to do it. Let those jobs go"
And what do we have to replace those jobs? Biotech? Nope. That's going overseas, too. That was our last frontier. What's the "Wilderbeast" coming next after biotech?
Oh and also take note that US corporations keep screaming for experienced, high-end employees for the high-end jobs (the only >$20/hr jobs we have left now), but guess what? You can't get high-end skills without low-end experience. Which means entry level work.
Entry level xxx-industry jobs in America? No such animal any more. All gone overseas.
They bring their bean counters and market droids in to decide how to make a product - the same fools that are spiraling Sony into an all too American "fiscal quarter by fiscal quarter" style of corporate myopia.
Sony's (and other companies') top minds do the bidding of these bean counters and market droids.
Small, agile companies are the ones who let their top minds steer the product development ship.
"You are barred from having a manufacturing job not because of the Chinese but because of the federal minimum wage laws (among other economic conditions)."
So basically, to compete with China, we need to start working at 60 cents a day.
Do you realize what this will do to America's spending power? It would plunge us into utter poverty. And the rest of the world, too.
"In a nutshell, yes, I am arguing that. In much the same way that many different wireless providers originally threw their antennas up"
Hold up. You made an error right there.
Putting up wireless towers and WAP's is profoundly cheaper, faster, and less disruptive, than digging up the ground to lay one network of fiber after another.
You will not ever see a city where two networks of fiber are laid to the same houses. Not with Government intervention, nor without.
Corporations tend to get what they want, and they are the most efficient parasites upon the rest of the world: the environment, the Government, and the working class.
That precludes stupidity in the social darwinistic sense. It's a great sign of a highly evolved predator.
I say corporations have less rights as "legal persons" *rolling eyes* than you as a biological person have.
Right now, it seems corporations have more rights, and that's B.S.
Corporations should be more legally vulnerable to journalist activity than persons, even celebrities.
As for argument #1, well, determining what is a journalist should be fairly easy: did that person who posted Circuit City's secrets have ties to competing businesses? If not, they pass muster. Sorry, Circuit City.
"By that logic, no insurers would ever pay out. Thus, they would eventually have no customers so they would go out of business."
I can most credibly say that insurance companies would LOVE to not pay out. They try to avoid paying out all the time. This is part of why people absolutely hate insurance and why state regulators are coming down so hard on them all the time.
All corporations would like to not make good on their obligations if they can get away with it. It's the inherent nature of capitalism.
Slashdot Mirror
"Shut down" in this case, meaning Microsoft is BANNED from selling new copies of Windows to EU countries.
You can't shut down an international megacorporation, but you can treat them to a Boston Tea Party.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
WARNING: Trick question.
We use Linux. :)
Bye dude, you're too stupid to argue with.
Civilization cannot create networks without a Government. Better yet, they never have. Infrastructure has never existed without Government. What I say is a historical fact. Government did good by giving us the Internet. Historical fact. If you disagree, log off now. It's as simple as that.
And without Government, you would instead be under the control of your local warlord. Who would NOT allow you freedom of speech. Government does good by ensuring said warlord won't send thugs to snipe you dead from 500 yards for criticizing them.
That's two reasons why you're an idiot and why few people, if anyone, agrees with your retarded sig.
Just think about what you will do after you post your brain dead response: you will go back to living under a Government and most of all, you will like that Government and bend over for that Government and you will do it with a smile.
Otherwise you will move to a desert island and you will shut up.
Regarding your sig, I can name one time that Government did good.
Government enabled you to be able to criticize Government on a worldwide medium.
If you hate Government so much, then why not move to a desert island and build your own communications network?
This is but one way that you're perfectly happy to enjoy the benefits of Government while at the same time devaluing its very existence. No, I don't expect a reply from you cowardly Looneytarians.
That's happening as we speak. Which is why Libertarianism can never happen: not many people follow your logic. You even have major dissent among the nerd crowd. Starting with me, of course.
You mean the way Libertarians consider their opposition "communists" or "statists" (translation: less than human).
On planet Libertaria, I can imagine that question being quite relevant when you Libertarians find yourselves confronted with a socialist counterculture. Yeehaw, get your thirty oughts we's goin for some target practice, yip yiiip!!
You mean, the ends justify the means?
I'd rather be sacrificed by a bullet to the head right quick, right now, than be one of the unlucky people in your paradise of greed and selfishness, one of the poor people who are sentenced to die slowly by starvation.
Oh and about all those weapons you keep talking about wanting the unrestricted right to having? I'm in favor of that, actually. Especially when the starving masses use them against you. Happens every time a "Libertaria" is founded. Oh wait, there has never been a Libertaria. It's nothing more than a myth.
Dead by a Communist's bullet, or dead by toxic waste, cancer, or simple starvation? Dead is still dead, whether it's by the malice of Communism or the utter negligence and apathy of Libertarianism.
Communism is the enemy of freedom; Libertarianism could lead to human extinction.
Your pathetic attempt at poking fun at Richard Stallman is duly noted.
If it weren't for him you'd be paying through the nose even more for every piece of software you use now.
Big business and free software are enemies - for every business that would LOVE to use software for free there's a company desperately hoping to make them pay for it. The GPL ensures that there is at least a balance partially in favor of everyone - businesses and citizens - using some software for free.
I can't believe this one is only a 2. Come on, people, laugh for crying out loud. :(
First of all, WHY WAS BLUEZHIFT MODDED DOWN??? Jeez. Corporations buy up patents and lock up competing technology all the time. Hello, electric cars?
Thyamine:
That's why I feel nanobot therapy should be restricted to the hospital in a safe environment where bots can't be screwed up by outside energy.
Faylone:
Why would this therapy damage your white blood cells?
a Nanobot that blacklists certain virii and bacteria and kills them on sight.
It should be a simple enough function and if it terminates after a few hours everything should be okay.
That would utterly rock - no more ineffective drugs with side effects.
Please, by all means, tell the world about these entry level jobs.
Get documentation.
Any foot of fiber costs orders of magnitude more than any foot of wireless range, anywhere, underground or suspended along poles.
I'm no fan of the freewheeling free market. I'll pay higher prices for "Made in a Western Nation". I do now, whenever it's possible.
"Hence the reason why we choose not to do it. Let those jobs go"
And what do we have to replace those jobs? Biotech? Nope. That's going overseas, too. That was our last frontier. What's the "Wilderbeast" coming next after biotech?
Oh and also take note that US corporations keep screaming for experienced, high-end employees for the high-end jobs (the only >$20/hr jobs we have left now), but guess what? You can't get high-end skills without low-end experience. Which means entry level work.
Entry level xxx-industry jobs in America? No such animal any more. All gone overseas.
They bring their bean counters and market droids in to decide how to make a product - the same fools that are spiraling Sony into an all too American "fiscal quarter by fiscal quarter" style of corporate myopia.
Sony's (and other companies') top minds do the bidding of these bean counters and market droids.
Small, agile companies are the ones who let their top minds steer the product development ship.
"You are barred from having a manufacturing job not because of the Chinese but because of the federal minimum wage laws (among other economic conditions)."
So basically, to compete with China, we need to start working at 60 cents a day.
Do you realize what this will do to America's spending power? It would plunge us into utter poverty. And the rest of the world, too.
"In a nutshell, yes, I am arguing that. In much the same way that many different wireless providers originally threw their antennas up"
Hold up. You made an error right there.
Putting up wireless towers and WAP's is profoundly cheaper, faster, and less disruptive, than digging up the ground to lay one network of fiber after another.
You will not ever see a city where two networks of fiber are laid to the same houses. Not with Government intervention, nor without.
If Americans are barred from having manufacturing jobs (which sell to the US market), then hell, why should anyone?
Give us our jobs back or let the machines take over.
If the Government had stayed out of the cable/phone company issue, a monopoly would have happened anyway.
Or do you intend upon arguing that several different companies would have laid their own fiber networks across an entire city?
Corporations tend to get what they want, and they are the most efficient parasites upon the rest of the world: the environment, the Government, and the working class.
That precludes stupidity in the social darwinistic sense. It's a great sign of a highly evolved predator.
the exact opposite is true.
Never attribute to incompetence what can be explained by malice (i.e., greed)...
I say corporations have less rights as "legal persons" *rolling eyes* than you as a biological person have.
Right now, it seems corporations have more rights, and that's B.S.
Corporations should be more legally vulnerable to journalist activity than persons, even celebrities.
As for argument #1, well, determining what is a journalist should be fairly easy: did that person who posted Circuit City's secrets have ties to competing businesses? If not, they pass muster. Sorry, Circuit City.
"By that logic, no insurers would ever pay out. Thus, they would eventually have no customers so they would go out of business."
I can most credibly say that insurance companies would LOVE to not pay out. They try to avoid paying out all the time. This is part of why people absolutely hate insurance and why state regulators are coming down so hard on them all the time.
All corporations would like to not make good on their obligations if they can get away with it. It's the inherent nature of capitalism.
A totally transparent populace ruled by a totally secret Government is the perfect model of national security!
[Republican parody mode off]