> we live in a society, and thus social norms do matter.
Only to those who decide to follow those norms. In many places in America, it is considered a "social norm" that you don't smoke pot, and those that do are trying to rape our children (not literally). Just because a large group of people say something is wrong, it isn't necessarily true.
If I decide to smoke pot because in reality there is nothing wrong with it and some ass decides to turn me in, the only way they matter to me is that I am a victim of them.
Not using moral relativism is just another form of mob rule -- which is not to say it's always, or even commonly, wrong.
> If you don't think an ad campaign declaring "File Sharing: It's Music to our Ears" condones just such illegal filesharing,
If you don't think you can find any non-RIAA music on P2P networks, you're being just as blatantly ignorant as someone who says all music should be totally free.
> If we dropped some of the stigma around the Constitution, it could be _changed_ and actually be a living document that helps the US develop into the future
Because if it can be changed to help us, it can also be changed (more easily) to hurt us... horribly. THAT is why the constitution must not change.
> You would expose a six-year-old to hardcore pornography?
Don't assume that just because YOU want to keep your child ignorant, everyone else does as well. I, personally, would not show porn to a kid, but you have no real basis to call him "sick" for it. It is in poor taste, according to the current views of a large chunk of society (nearing 100% even), but regardless of what many would tell you, "social norms" are (mostly) based on opinions.
HP has been making Inkjet printers for years, and they were great quality. Now they fall apart about a week after the freakishly short warranty (90 days???) expires. You can't honestly say that HP forgot how to make them, but you CAN say that they became greedy and started using crappy parts and very bad designs -- probably by choice.
If your printer's only motor relies on a 2mm piece of nylon under constant stress to work (and then you make sure there are no replacements available), your design is horribly flawed -- or your morals.
Pro-P2P != Pro copyright infringement. There is no lack of consistency. They think the software is good, but do not condone the illegal activities done on it.
Too hard for you to read and think for yourself instead of just spouting BS?
Eh, who knows. I probably said something stupid & got P.O.ed.:)
It's interesting, when people talk politics and don't see eye to eye, they can immediately think they have nothing in common with the other, when in fact they happen to agree on a lot of other things.
Or maybe it has nothing to do with that, who knows...
And you're a pompous ass. Seriously, who do you think you are, telling him what he believes? An Atheist beieves there is no God. Admitting there isn't 100% proof for his stance does not mean his stance changed any, it just means he can't prove it.
And a flashlight. A what? Yeah, having a flashlight around is handy, but I don't think the cellphone is the first obvious choice. However, it is better than all the other stupid crap they put in phones. At least a light is useful.
> One advantage of that is that they can easily get the newest phones without waiting for their mobile operator to get rid of the old models.
Ummm... When you get a free phone with a service contract, it does not mean that you can't buy a different phone at any time & switch over (as long as the networks are compatible).
> but your scenario applies to all types of software, not just open source.
I'm a bit late to the discussion, but I would think that scenario would apply to Open Source less than closed-source. With most open source software, isn't there some kind of code review by other members of the general public? In proprietary systems, if one has a high-enough position, they can just "toss it in" before final compile.
Who would have guessed that ignorant hicks could improve the English language?
I suppose it makes sense, though, that someone with less education could come up with simple & obvious solutions (although I'd prefer using a word that didn't make you sound stupid).
Slashdot Mirror
> we live in a society, and thus social norms do matter.
Only to those who decide to follow those norms. In many places in America, it is considered a "social norm" that you don't smoke pot, and those that do are trying to rape our children (not literally). Just because a large group of people say something is wrong, it isn't necessarily true.
If I decide to smoke pot because in reality there is nothing wrong with it and some ass decides to turn me in, the only way they matter to me is that I am a victim of them.
Not using moral relativism is just another form of mob rule -- which is not to say it's always, or even commonly, wrong.
> If you don't think an ad campaign declaring "File Sharing: It's Music to our Ears" condones just such illegal filesharing,
If you don't think you can find any non-RIAA music on P2P networks, you're being just as blatantly ignorant as someone who says all music should be totally free.
> take the steering wheel off and drive with a monkey wrench.
That would be a bitch to parallel park...
> Wouldn't he tell both the cops & Kensington to "go fuck yourself"?
Of course. Unless it was HIS laptop. Then, anyone who doesn't find it immediately is hauled off to Cuba and summarily executed.
> If we dropped some of the stigma around the Constitution, it could be _changed_ and actually be a living document that helps the US develop into the future
Because if it can be changed to help us, it can also be changed (more easily) to hurt us... horribly. THAT is why the constitution must not change.
> You would expose a six-year-old to hardcore pornography?
Don't assume that just because YOU want to keep your child ignorant, everyone else does as well. I, personally, would not show porn to a kid, but you have no real basis to call him "sick" for it. It is in poor taste, according to the current views of a large chunk of society (nearing 100% even), but regardless of what many would tell you, "social norms" are (mostly) based on opinions.
> That's easy to prove. Olympic marmots, for example. I even have pictures.
Can you be more specific? How have we witnessed them evolve? I tried googling, but nothing relevant came up .
> in the us nobody can stop me from selling something that i own
Unless there is a court-ordered injunction.
> Because the industry and the stuff is NEW.
HP has been making Inkjet printers for years, and they were great quality. Now they fall apart about a week after the freakishly short warranty (90 days???) expires. You can't honestly say that HP forgot how to make them, but you CAN say that they became greedy and started using crappy parts and very bad designs -- probably by choice.
If your printer's only motor relies on a 2mm piece of nylon under constant stress to work (and then you make sure there are no replacements available), your design is horribly flawed -- or your morals.
(I tried fixing my DJ 3820 today, in case you are wondering where that came from.)
> there are some methods for finding more useful information than bullshit, such as [...] moderation
I think you put too much faith into moderators. If they see something they didn't know, they usually mod it up -- and it's usually wrong anyway.
> Grousing that some artists decide to do just that leads to a suggestion that perhaps they shouldn't be allowed to do so?
Nooo, they should have the right, but If someone chooses not to join that, they should not be cut off from the world & radio, etc.
Pro-P2P != Pro copyright infringement. There is no lack of consistency. They think the software is good, but do not condone the illegal activities done on it.
Too hard for you to read and think for yourself instead of just spouting BS?
> somehow you're my freak and I'm your foe,
:)
Eh, who knows. I probably said something stupid & got P.O.ed.
It's interesting, when people talk politics and don't see eye to eye, they can immediately think they have nothing in common with the other, when in fact they happen to agree on a lot of other things.
Or maybe it has nothing to do with that, who knows...
> I'm rubber, you're glue.
:)
That was funnier than the other posting
> you're not an atheist, you're an agnostic.
And you're a pompous ass. Seriously, who do you think you are, telling him what he believes? An Atheist beieves there is no God. Admitting there isn't 100% proof for his stance does not mean his stance changed any, it just means he can't prove it.
> Ice Tea in a bottle often referred to as Snapple even when talking about another brand.
I always thought New Yorkers were complete morons. Now I have proof...
> The Nokia 1100. Just a phone
And a flashlight. A what? Yeah, having a flashlight around is handy, but I don't think the cellphone is the first obvious choice. However, it is better than all the other stupid crap they put in phones. At least a light is useful.
> One advantage of that is that they can easily get the newest phones without waiting for their mobile operator to get rid of the old models.
Ummm... When you get a free phone with a service contract, it does not mean that you can't buy a different phone at any time & switch over (as long as the networks are compatible).
gotcha
err... I meant research. Close enough
> Doesn't all information want to be free?
:)
See sig
> Only a true patriot could come up with this reason for banning P2P networks.
Where did he say that P2P should be banned (perhaps I misunderstand your meaning)?
As for the excuse, though, "reasearch" is always a good answer
> Why would you put some old geezer's picture in the "About Me" section.
Maybe he's paranoid that the police state will crack down on him for cavorting with terrorists & passing them information.
> but your scenario applies to all types of software, not just open source.
I'm a bit late to the discussion, but I would think that scenario would apply to Open Source less than closed-source. With most open source software, isn't there some kind of code review by other members of the general public? In proprietary systems, if one has a high-enough position, they can just "toss it in" before final compile.
> solved in the Southern U.S. with "y'all"
Who would have guessed that ignorant hicks could improve the English language?
I suppose it makes sense, though, that someone with less education could come up with simple & obvious solutions (although I'd prefer using a word that didn't make you sound stupid).
> That is done for paying respect to fallen soldiers.
Asking for respect is not a legal mandate, and nor should it be.
It may be the "right" thing to do, but that's as far as it should go.