The question was would you trust it. Considering the rampant corruption in the world, it's a pretty fair assumption that there are going to be financial and political interests steering the "engineering" decisions.
It's not the reactor that I don't trust. It's not the engineers I don't trust.
The managers, politicians, and those with financial interests I don't trust for two fucking seconds.
Put it another way... I would trust being transported from place to place with a transporter beam just fine.... in theory. However, not when operated by a capitalist corporation that is trying to save money on costly maintenance and inspections and has figured out that my accidental death is cheaper in the long run than hiring those expensive "Star Fleet" trained technicians and decides to go with somebody with an online degree.
I wouldn't trust your grandfather for two seconds.
Two things:
1) Old people run dangerously low on fucks, and therefore have much less to give. Not good. Especially, if they can be amused by whatever their addled, senile brains have come up with. 2) The old adage that youth and skill will always fail when faced with old age and treachery. After years of collecting data on this phenomenon I confidently state this is as true as gravity.
My grandfather is gone, and I do miss him terribly, but I do also sleep better without worrying what prank he is going to play next. That, and my mother screaming, "get your balls off my couch old man". He refused to wear anything other than a kimono that did not fit him.
Principles are what keep me away from Apple. I can't own my own hardware and I disagree, vehemently, with the very idea of a walled garden.
Apple in many ways is superior. It's just terrible that you have to sacrifice freedom to enjoy their products. What is a tragedy is the number of people agreeing to do so.
Sure, the government could fake an anal probing and install their monitoring infrastructure in my nether cavities, but is it worth all that trouble?
It's not about if you can be tapped, but how much resources were used to do the tapping. ZRTP (endpoint-to-endpoint encryption) mentioned in their alternative Jitsi, would substantially raise the bar for casual automated interception.
That's the idea really. Make it to where everything they intercept is heavily encrypted with well used, well scrutinized encryption methods. If they want to bypass that encryption it will require having direct control over your device, to have direct influence on the platforms and software, or well known backdoors in software. That substantially raises the bar on multiple fronts since it will require specially crafted malware, special legislation (boy will that be unpopular), and maintained secrecy (conspiracy theorists say that have it already) with cooperating companies. As for the secrecy, we are discussing patented technology to help the government automate eavesdropping right? Not like it is a big secret....
The article has the answer already. It is time to move on. Find a newer platform that will not allow eavesdroppers and act only as a middleman to setup heavily encrypted communications. There are plenty of SAAS providers that only store encrypted data so they can turn over that data on demand to law enforcement and not have the keys.
What may help the most, is what is lagging ass... IPv6. I can see a future with DNS records and open source P2P services that will allow us to directly control who can initiate communications with us. Once you get around not requiring a middleman to punch through NAT for VOIP services it becomes substantially easier to perform call setup and tear down.
and ALL THE TIME they had allowed these pirated installs
I understand the spirit of your argument, but they don't have control over those pirated installs.
Lucky Patcher will remove the Google License Verification check from any app 99% of the time. I use it to remove advertisements as well and rarely have used it to evaluate a game before purchasing.
Granted, that does require root, but I think a high percentage of people installing apks manually are also rooted at the same time.
On that note, I have not purchased any games either. Permissions on Android are a clusterfuck of stupid. There is no way in hell I am going to give 99% of the permissions to a game app that they want. Especially, the contact permissions. That's why on the stuff I really use I forcefully remove those permissions with a permission unlocker.
As a result, I am not even downloading or playing that many free game apps either. To me, the whole Android system is broken, and I would sooner masturbate with broken glass and gasoline before I became an iTard. No offense Apple Fanbois, I just can't take the whole happy happy joy joy walled garden stuff regardless of how cool, shiny, and allegedly pleasant the UI is.
I would participate in the market a little bit more, but they need to fix their shit first. Break down the permissions a heck of a lot more and have native support (without rooting!) to grant or revoke permissions.
The developers are not going to dictate to me that they have full access to my contact list and can send it back home. Not happening.
What I think is really interesting is if that developer would release how much money they received for all the in-app purchases from both legitimate and illegitimate running copies.
Religion may be wrong, but there is a pressure to have large numbers of families from cultural pressures, which in some cases, may be linked to religions.
The article itself mentions poor and unstable countries being the hardest hit which is more or less correct. Through religious pressures (lack of contraceptive technologies), and societal pressures (children as a resource and "hedging" your bets) you will see women in the worst situations having the most children.
Fertility rates are not dropping, or at least I think fertility implies the ability to have children. In more developed countries you will find a larger population of sophisticated and educated women having less children, and later in life.
How does that apply to a country like Saudi Arabia, or a Muslim country that is not that unstable but still has a religious and cultural pressure to have large families?
China does not have a fertility issue. Large families were normal in China until population control was put in force, which in some cases can be extreme, including forced abortion.
The problems are going to come from the worst places on the planet, and those do have plenty of societal and religious pressures exacerbating the situation.
The male kind is a plastic funnel 2 to 3 inches in width and about 4 inches deep. A male astronaut would urinate directly into the funnel. He would have to keep 2 to 3 inches away to not get sucked into the funnel.
1) I'm sure some astronauts had to keep farther away from it than others 2) I'm thinking that on really long missions getting sucked into the funnel might be advantageous... or not.
The solid waste collection bag is a detachable bag that is made of a special fabric that lets gas but not liquid or solid through. This allows the fan at the back of the vacuum chamber to pull the waste into the bag. When the astronaut is done using it, he/she twists their bag and places it in a waste storage drawer.
Sounds like space is absolutely not the place for Big Al after hitting the Golden Corral.
Are you saying we should become Oompa Loompas? Because they don't look very happy to me.
That's bullshit. They're just working. Do you have a smile on all the time while you are working?
If you wanted to see their facial expressions we should just put those inward facing helmet cams on them and throw them back in the jungle with the snozwangers, hornswaggelers, and vermicious knids.
It's not like Charlie is buggin them all the time about their flair. I'd love to work at that factory but I don't meet the height requirements and I can't sing. *sigh*
Who said I was happy? I am decidedly unhappy about all of this.
You're doing it again too. Nobody stole anybody's else's work. Did not happen.
In fact, the only times that it may have happened is when the 1%'s (aka Rich Whitey) use their lawyers and fancy book learning to swindle poor artists out of their copyrights entirely. Or it could be Suge Knight hanging Vanilla Ice out of a hotel balcony if you believe the story.
What I am not okay with is the fact we are using intellectual property as an excuse to violate our fundamental freedoms and do more damage to society by trying to hammer an outmoded system of encouraging contributions towards the Public Domain.
That is the very idea in the first place I hope you realize. It is not to push forward the perverse, deeply offensive, and incredibly entitled idea that Man can own an idea or an expression.
We are supposed to using a system (and changing it if need be) that will encourage people to contribute towards the Public Domain. Simple as that.
I refuse to use the word theft, because intellectually, I know that it is wrong. Not only is it wrong, but it is mostly used out of ignorance, fear, often anger, and a manipulative push to destroy the Public Domain and allow effectively permanent ownership of ideas and expressions.
In the end I do want people to be rewarded for their contributions simply because it is the most effective way I know to encourage them to contribute.
So no, I'm not happy about it, I don't want to gloat and act immature about how easy it is to infringe upon copyrights, nor do I wish for people to be abused and not able to make a living.
I can however use my brain, and understand the difference between theft and copyright infringement, and why it is so important to never let the word theft go unchallenged because it poisons and manipulates the conversation that we really do need to be having.
Ok.... What is a Geyser? Is that like some French thing that squirts water up your ass? My stove is gas too....
I also said most of everything. Yes, major appliances are AC, and we can have specialized outlets just for them.
As for transmission, I was talking about outlets. Transmitting energy to the homes can still be AC, although I would love to see more point-source energy generation as AC is not all that efficient. Plus, I'm sure a lot of people on the East Coast of the US have some choice words to say about power lines being above ground all the time.
Why standardize the brick? I'm talking about creating a standardized outlet that can negotiate the power requirements upon demand. Until you actually negotiated a session you could literally lick the outlet. Quite a few safety benefits in such a model. Why worry about toaster ovens burning down the house when the outlet is set to turn off power in 60 minutes?
It would be far more efficient overall to not have any external bricks at all, but internal or centralized ones, that can deliver variable amounts of power.
My Android phone is always telling me that it is fully charged and that I can save electricity while unplugging it. Well, that does not work when I need to sleep and the phone will lose at least 1/3rd of its charge by morning and not even fully recharge by the time I have taking a shower and left out the door.
It would be more energy efficient if I could leave it plugged in and it was smart enough to start requesting enough power to top off the battery before the alarm went off, or at a set time period, or when the battery reaches a certain level.
In any case, I was talking about smarter outlets and the elimination of power bricks that we just end up throwing away.
No stealing occurred. His opportunity to sell it remains intact as his possession of the code and legal entitlements (copyright) were never impacted.
The problem with this "but they still have it" line of reasoning is that while it may work on an individual basis, it doesn't work in the aggregate
Yes, yes it does. Regardless whether it is an act committed towards an individual, or a group, the only thing occurring is copyright infringement.
What you are trying to say is that mass copyright infringement is detrimental so we should apply the same consequences of theft to copyright infringement, even though the definitions are radically different.
If everyone steals the app, then the developer's time is indeed being stolen, since they are getting paid nothing for their work.
That's impossible. I can only "steal" your time if I physically restrain you. Even then, it is not really your time I have deprived you of, but your free will. So what you are really trying to say is that because mass copyright infringement is undesirable to the coder, that as a group we have deprived him of the desired outcome of his time.
What kind of entitled 4-year old bullshit mentality is that?
His time was not stolen and the fruits of his labor still exist. The app exists. He is not entitled to massive sales, riches, fame, and the group sex with hot celebrities that he may be hoping for. We all want a pony too right?
This isn't a modern thing, as much as we like to make it out to be one. People have been selling intangibles for a long time and "theft" has applied to non-physical goods for just as long.
Since when??
People have not been selling intangibles for a long time. That's ridiculous. People have been selling their labor and skills for thousands of years. It took quite a bit of effort to make a book before the printing press. It was not an "intangible" that was sold back then, but the freakin book.
I think you are trying to conflate privileges that were granted by royalty several hundred years ago. It is quite a stretch to equate that with "sales". Modern intellectual property law only goes back ~200 years. It is not coincidence that in all that time they did not explicitly use the word theft either to describe copyright infringement. They used the word infringement instead. Wonder why....
Your real issue apparently is that with a ubiquitous and cheap means of distributing intellectual property (perfectly every time), that a developer has far less abilities to control said distribution with an iron grip to extract payment in exchange for a grant of legal entitlements to use said intellectual property.
That's a real issue. We can discuss it. We are not going to be irrational and incorrect with the usage of the word steal while we do it though......
That's a different problem, and by no means an excuse to use the word steal in such a way. Two wrongs don't make a right.
It's wholly incorrect, inappropriate, illogical, an unethical to use the word steal with respect to copyright infringement. It will never be useful, nor constructive in any meaningful conversation regarding the Public Domain and how Intellectual Property can encourage further contributions towards it.
If you want to have a serious conversation regarding these matters, then we can have it when you are ready to sit down rationally and stop using manipulative tactics to steer the conversation.
This is not the evolution of language. It is the misappropriation of a word to give meaning to an action that is wholly inappropriate.
Evolution of language is just fine. For example, we could all agree that the word rape is an acceptable word to describe unflattering comments that a man may make to a woman regarding her pictures on Facebook. What is not fine, is applying the consequences of the "archaic" definition of the word at the same time.
If you insist on the stupidity of using the word steal to mean, "any acts of copyright infringement", then you must at the same time alter the perceived consequences and negativity of that word.
That does not make any sense does it? Why pervert and devalue the word steal when it is quite useful to mean the deprivation of real property without authorization? Why confuse the word with wholly contradictory definition?
Doing something that ridiculous is not the evolution of language at all. In fact, it is most often used as a manipulative tactic in the overall discussion of intellectual property, the Public Domain, and the evolution of our society with respect to both.
I hope we are not using the same power outlets in 2037.
That would be stupid and wasteful. Most of everything we use now is DC. We should be moving to smart power outlets where power requirements can be negotiated and we can get rid of all the AC/DC bricks we have to lug around.
Some stuff might use AC better like toaster ovens and hair dryers, but that can be provided at the outlet with some negotiation as well. Plus we also have special outlets already for appliances like washer/dryers, refrigerators, etc.
It would just be a real shame not to upgrade considering all the power that is wasted right now.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes.. yes.. yes... all good points.
The question was would you trust it. Considering the rampant corruption in the world, it's a pretty fair assumption that there are going to be financial and political interests steering the "engineering" decisions.
It's not the reactor that I don't trust. It's not the engineers I don't trust.
The managers, politicians, and those with financial interests I don't trust for two fucking seconds.
Put it another way... I would trust being transported from place to place with a transporter beam just fine.... in theory. However, not when operated by a capitalist corporation that is trying to save money on costly maintenance and inspections and has figured out that my accidental death is cheaper in the long run than hiring those expensive "Star Fleet" trained technicians and decides to go with somebody with an online degree.
I wouldn't trust your grandfather for two seconds.
Two things:
1) Old people run dangerously low on fucks, and therefore have much less to give. Not good. Especially, if they can be amused by whatever their addled, senile brains have come up with.
2) The old adage that youth and skill will always fail when faced with old age and treachery. After years of collecting data on this phenomenon I confidently state this is as true as gravity.
My grandfather is gone, and I do miss him terribly, but I do also sleep better without worrying what prank he is going to play next. That, and my mother screaming, "get your balls off my couch old man". He refused to wear anything other than a kimono that did not fit him.
It would not matter if it came with blowjobs.
Principles are what keep me away from Apple. I can't own my own hardware and I disagree, vehemently, with the very idea of a walled garden.
Apple in many ways is superior. It's just terrible that you have to sacrifice freedom to enjoy their products. What is a tragedy is the number of people agreeing to do so.
That's a rather defeatist attitude.
Sure, the government could fake an anal probing and install their monitoring infrastructure in my nether cavities, but is it worth all that trouble?
It's not about if you can be tapped, but how much resources were used to do the tapping. ZRTP (endpoint-to-endpoint encryption) mentioned in their alternative Jitsi, would substantially raise the bar for casual automated interception.
That's the idea really. Make it to where everything they intercept is heavily encrypted with well used, well scrutinized encryption methods. If they want to bypass that encryption it will require having direct control over your device, to have direct influence on the platforms and software, or well known backdoors in software. That substantially raises the bar on multiple fronts since it will require specially crafted malware, special legislation (boy will that be unpopular), and maintained secrecy (conspiracy theorists say that have it already) with cooperating companies. As for the secrecy, we are discussing patented technology to help the government automate eavesdropping right? Not like it is a big secret....
The article has the answer already. It is time to move on. Find a newer platform that will not allow eavesdroppers and act only as a middleman to setup heavily encrypted communications. There are plenty of SAAS providers that only store encrypted data so they can turn over that data on demand to law enforcement and not have the keys.
What may help the most, is what is lagging ass... IPv6. I can see a future with DNS records and open source P2P services that will allow us to directly control who can initiate communications with us. Once you get around not requiring a middleman to punch through NAT for VOIP services it becomes substantially easier to perform call setup and tear down.
and ALL THE TIME they had allowed these pirated installs
I understand the spirit of your argument, but they don't have control over those pirated installs.
Lucky Patcher will remove the Google License Verification check from any app 99% of the time. I use it to remove advertisements as well and rarely have used it to evaluate a game before purchasing.
Granted, that does require root, but I think a high percentage of people installing apks manually are also rooted at the same time.
On that note, I have not purchased any games either. Permissions on Android are a clusterfuck of stupid. There is no way in hell I am going to give 99% of the permissions to a game app that they want. Especially, the contact permissions. That's why on the stuff I really use I forcefully remove those permissions with a permission unlocker.
As a result, I am not even downloading or playing that many free game apps either. To me, the whole Android system is broken, and I would sooner masturbate with broken glass and gasoline before I became an iTard. No offense Apple Fanbois, I just can't take the whole happy happy joy joy walled garden stuff regardless of how cool, shiny, and allegedly pleasant the UI is.
I would participate in the market a little bit more, but they need to fix their shit first. Break down the permissions a heck of a lot more and have native support (without rooting!) to grant or revoke permissions.
The developers are not going to dictate to me that they have full access to my contact list and can send it back home. Not happening.
What I think is really interesting is if that developer would release how much money they received for all the in-app purchases from both legitimate and illegitimate running copies.
Well, not all PC games are designed to split the screen for multiple players in regards to FPS. At least not that many that I recall.
My experience is by no means extensive, so I may be wrong.
This not troll.
Religion may be wrong, but there is a pressure to have large numbers of families from cultural pressures, which in some cases, may be linked to religions.
The article itself mentions poor and unstable countries being the hardest hit which is more or less correct. Through religious pressures (lack of contraceptive technologies), and societal pressures (children as a resource and "hedging" your bets) you will see women in the worst situations having the most children.
Fertility rates are not dropping, or at least I think fertility implies the ability to have children. In more developed countries you will find a larger population of sophisticated and educated women having less children, and later in life.
How does that apply to a country like Saudi Arabia, or a Muslim country that is not that unstable but still has a religious and cultural pressure to have large families?
China does not have a fertility issue. Large families were normal in China until population control was put in force, which in some cases can be extreme, including forced abortion.
The problems are going to come from the worst places on the planet, and those do have plenty of societal and religious pressures exacerbating the situation.
Funny read
The male kind is a plastic funnel 2 to 3 inches in width and about 4 inches deep. A male astronaut would urinate directly into the funnel. He would have to keep 2 to 3 inches away to not get sucked into the funnel.
1) I'm sure some astronauts had to keep farther away from it than others
2) I'm thinking that on really long missions getting sucked into the funnel might be advantageous... or not.
The solid waste collection bag is a detachable bag that is made of a special fabric that lets gas but not liquid or solid through. This allows the fan at the back of the vacuum chamber to pull the waste into the bag. When the astronaut is done using it, he/she twists their bag and places it in a waste storage drawer.
Sounds like space is absolutely not the place for Big Al after hitting the Golden Corral.
the next user to touch that self-cleaning toilet seat will be converted directly into a lemony-fresh slurry
For some users that I know that will be about as useful as they have been their whole lives.
Are you saying we should become Oompa Loompas? Because they don't look very happy to me.
That's bullshit. They're just working. Do you have a smile on all the time while you are working?
If you wanted to see their facial expressions we should just put those inward facing helmet cams on them and throw them back in the jungle with the snozwangers, hornswaggelers, and vermicious knids.
It's not like Charlie is buggin them all the time about their flair. I'd love to work at that factory but I don't meet the height requirements and I can't sing. *sigh*
People are going to end up in Guantanomo anyways. Once something like that starts they will continue to find a reason to do so.
We could at least be amused while it is happening. Think of it as a reacharound.
For just $93USD more, I'll leave your sex in place when I retrieve my hand.
So... for a hundred dollars you will not rip my off my johnson? Sounds quite reasonable. Do you happen to work for Viacom?
Um, why is that a different situation than an AC outlet going out?
Who said I was happy? I am decidedly unhappy about all of this.
You're doing it again too. Nobody stole anybody's else's work. Did not happen.
In fact, the only times that it may have happened is when the 1%'s (aka Rich Whitey) use their lawyers and fancy book learning to swindle poor artists out of their copyrights entirely. Or it could be Suge Knight hanging Vanilla Ice out of a hotel balcony if you believe the story.
What I am not okay with is the fact we are using intellectual property as an excuse to violate our fundamental freedoms and do more damage to society by trying to hammer an outmoded system of encouraging contributions towards the Public Domain.
That is the very idea in the first place I hope you realize. It is not to push forward the perverse, deeply offensive, and incredibly entitled idea that Man can own an idea or an expression.
We are supposed to using a system (and changing it if need be) that will encourage people to contribute towards the Public Domain. Simple as that.
I refuse to use the word theft, because intellectually, I know that it is wrong. Not only is it wrong, but it is mostly used out of ignorance, fear, often anger, and a manipulative push to destroy the Public Domain and allow effectively permanent ownership of ideas and expressions.
In the end I do want people to be rewarded for their contributions simply because it is the most effective way I know to encourage them to contribute.
So no, I'm not happy about it, I don't want to gloat and act immature about how easy it is to infringe upon copyrights, nor do I wish for people to be abused and not able to make a living.
I can however use my brain, and understand the difference between theft and copyright infringement, and why it is so important to never let the word theft go unchallenged because it poisons and manipulates the conversation that we really do need to be having.
Ok.... What is a Geyser? Is that like some French thing that squirts water up your ass? My stove is gas too....
I also said most of everything. Yes, major appliances are AC, and we can have specialized outlets just for them.
As for transmission, I was talking about outlets. Transmitting energy to the homes can still be AC, although I would love to see more point-source energy generation as AC is not all that efficient. Plus, I'm sure a lot of people on the East Coast of the US have some choice words to say about power lines being above ground all the time.
Why standardize the brick? I'm talking about creating a standardized outlet that can negotiate the power requirements upon demand. Until you actually negotiated a session you could literally lick the outlet. Quite a few safety benefits in such a model. Why worry about toaster ovens burning down the house when the outlet is set to turn off power in 60 minutes?
It would be far more efficient overall to not have any external bricks at all, but internal or centralized ones, that can deliver variable amounts of power.
My Android phone is always telling me that it is fully charged and that I can save electricity while unplugging it. Well, that does not work when I need to sleep and the phone will lose at least 1/3rd of its charge by morning and not even fully recharge by the time I have taking a shower and left out the door.
It would be more energy efficient if I could leave it plugged in and it was smart enough to start requesting enough power to top off the battery before the alarm went off, or at a set time period, or when the battery reaches a certain level.
In any case, I was talking about smarter outlets and the elimination of power bricks that we just end up throwing away.
Are you a fucking moron? While you're screwing your mom, she won't be making any money off the other clients
Not technically true.... I've seen these instructional videos on the Internets that show some mothers servicing several clients at the same time....
He can't sell it if everyone just steals it.
No stealing occurred. His opportunity to sell it remains intact as his possession of the code and legal entitlements (copyright) were never impacted.
The problem with this "but they still have it" line of reasoning is that while it may work on an individual basis, it doesn't work in the aggregate
Yes, yes it does. Regardless whether it is an act committed towards an individual, or a group, the only thing occurring is copyright infringement.
What you are trying to say is that mass copyright infringement is detrimental so we should apply the same consequences of theft to copyright infringement, even though the definitions are radically different.
If everyone steals the app, then the developer's time is indeed being stolen, since they are getting paid nothing for their work.
That's impossible. I can only "steal" your time if I physically restrain you. Even then, it is not really your time I have deprived you of, but your free will. So what you are really trying to say is that because mass copyright infringement is undesirable to the coder, that as a group we have deprived him of the desired outcome of his time.
What kind of entitled 4-year old bullshit mentality is that?
His time was not stolen and the fruits of his labor still exist. The app exists. He is not entitled to massive sales, riches, fame, and the group sex with hot celebrities that he may be hoping for. We all want a pony too right?
This isn't a modern thing, as much as we like to make it out to be one. People have been selling intangibles for a long time and "theft" has applied to non-physical goods for just as long.
Since when ??
People have not been selling intangibles for a long time. That's ridiculous. People have been selling their labor and skills for thousands of years. It took quite a bit of effort to make a book before the printing press. It was not an "intangible" that was sold back then, but the freakin book.
I think you are trying to conflate privileges that were granted by royalty several hundred years ago. It is quite a stretch to equate that with "sales". Modern intellectual property law only goes back ~200 years. It is not coincidence that in all that time they did not explicitly use the word theft either to describe copyright infringement. They used the word infringement instead. Wonder why....
Your real issue apparently is that with a ubiquitous and cheap means of distributing intellectual property (perfectly every time), that a developer has far less abilities to control said distribution with an iron grip to extract payment in exchange for a grant of legal entitlements to use said intellectual property.
That's a real issue. We can discuss it. We are not going to be irrational and incorrect with the usage of the word steal while we do it though......
That's a different problem, and by no means an excuse to use the word steal in such a way. Two wrongs don't make a right.
It's wholly incorrect, inappropriate, illogical, an unethical to use the word steal with respect to copyright infringement. It will never be useful, nor constructive in any meaningful conversation regarding the Public Domain and how Intellectual Property can encourage further contributions towards it.
If you want to have a serious conversation regarding these matters, then we can have it when you are ready to sit down rationally and stop using manipulative tactics to steer the conversation.
Language evolves.
Deal with it.
NO
This is not the evolution of language. It is the misappropriation of a word to give meaning to an action that is wholly inappropriate.
Evolution of language is just fine. For example, we could all agree that the word rape is an acceptable word to describe unflattering comments that a man may make to a woman regarding her pictures on Facebook. What is not fine, is applying the consequences of the "archaic" definition of the word at the same time.
If you insist on the stupidity of using the word steal to mean, "any acts of copyright infringement", then you must at the same time alter the perceived consequences and negativity of that word.
That does not make any sense does it? Why pervert and devalue the word steal when it is quite useful to mean the deprivation of real property without authorization? Why confuse the word with wholly contradictory definition?
Doing something that ridiculous is not the evolution of language at all. In fact, it is most often used as a manipulative tactic in the overall discussion of intellectual property, the Public Domain, and the evolution of our society with respect to both.
I hope we are not using the same power outlets in 2037.
That would be stupid and wasteful. Most of everything we use now is DC. We should be moving to smart power outlets where power requirements can be negotiated and we can get rid of all the AC/DC bricks we have to lug around.
Some stuff might use AC better like toaster ovens and hair dryers, but that can be provided at the outlet with some negotiation as well. Plus we also have special outlets already for appliances like washer/dryers, refrigerators, etc.
It would just be a real shame not to upgrade considering all the power that is wasted right now.
Does Polly want a cracker?
Don't be ridiculous. That's a constant, not a variable.
Jack.. is that you?
the igloo channel
Oh Canada, why do we continue to let you be a country?
-- Barney Stinson
Nooo..... Joker was portrayed excellently.
Say what you will about the first movie, but Heath Ledger made the 2nd movie stand out all on its own with his performance. It was eerily good.
The advantage of a gaming console is that you can sit with your kids in the same room and laugh and play games.
I would think setting up a gaming room with multiple screens could be cost prohibitive for most families.