You can think SJWs are total trash and still think Milo is an idiot, you know. He shifts positions depending on whatever is going to get him a lot of attention. Before Gamegate he said gamers were all "pungent beta male bollock-scratchers and twelve-year-olds" but after Gamergate he's supposed to be a hero?
Then of course there's that nonsense where he said his homosexuality was a farce because he wanted the attention. Once his family "accepted" his homosexuality and just wanted him to be happy, he "got bored" with it and now he's like, totally straight. Because according to his retarted conservative canard, gay people are endlessly flattered by the media and if you want to feel oppressed, you have to be straight.
He's a fucking toolbag, a troll of the highest order, and takes that part very very seriously.
How many news stories by the supposedly professional news gatherers are festooned with copies of tweets by some random joe? Many stories are 80-90% Twitter comments.
Oh, but don't you understand? "People are saying" this nonsense. That makes it oh so relevant.
Why is it that a patent only gives you a few precious years to earn your money back while requiring a LOT more investment
Because there are a lot more business interests involved that need patents to expire so they can be used to make more products. Copyright expiration let's people use old copyrighted works for free.
Really not many moneyed interests to benefit from copyright going to public domain.
I think the biggest issue is the expansion of 'IP'. Culture builds on what comes before it, it always has and always will. However in 'modern' times we (or more specifically companies) keep trying to lock culture away behind walls of laws about 'IP'.
The thing I hate the most about 'IP' is right in the name -- it's now treated as a piece of physical property, property that the owners have an absolute, indefinite right to.
Re: copying and success, he did the giveaway albums after the multi-platinum record and before the Hollywood soundtracks so... I don't really understand what you're trying to say?
He's trying to say that Trent is being hypocritical. That "it was ok when I did it, but not when you do it." He's outright encouraged fans to "copy" because he wanted them to screw over his label, but he can't stand it if others do it.
He did some work for movies as well. His soundtrack to the Social Network was quite effective and he shared a Best Score Academy Award with Atticus Ross.
That's kind of depressing, I mean, didn't he release the STEMs of his music for free so anyone could remix it? Has Apple rotted your brain Trent? Are you an ignorant, greedy old man now?
It's called being a "sell-out" by abandoning your earlier ideals, and it happens to lot of people who were once young rebels in the music industry.
The main reason so far as I know why unions exist is that worker productivity has steadily risen since the 1950s while wages have remained stagnant.
Unions exist thanks to the rise of Communism in the early 20th Century, which happened in response to the uncontrolled Capitalism of the 1800s (see: Gilded Age). I think that the US would eventually have gone through a Russia-style revolt if not for the rise of unions to curb the worst of the excesses. The Depression and FDR came at just the right time as well -- before it was too late. Ever since the 50s, Union power has been declining, and is almost gone by now.
Something they believe but cannot prove. I'm fine with that (I'm atheist/agnostic myself) but lets not pretend that aren't a shit-ton of atheists who assert with a fiery zeal of True Belief that there Is. No. God.
[1] Paging whipslash - if you happen to read this. It'd be cool to have better thread filtering. We used to just be able to set the threshold to a number (-1 to 5) and read all comments at or above that number. Much simpler IMO. Thanks!
I'd like a option to not only collapse -1 threads, but to not see any responses to those threads either. Have them totally collapsed together into one line. That's so I not only have to see super-troll posts, I don't see the replies of people who ought to know better and quote and respond to the original troll post. Even on moderated boards, that nonsense will make stuff get out of hand and hard to sort through as well.
I think the point that several people were trying to make to him is that sometimes having a good point scattered throughout a post doesn't make up for the post being full of ridiculously crazy shit. As in "this still is so off-the-wall, so stereotypical, I'm pretty sure I'm just being trolled for kicks."
Seriously? Who believes anything the NSA says at this point?
Well, when they say that IoT is going to be a security nightmare, and they think the NSA will be able to exploit it.. well I trust that they're telling the truth on that.
Arguably, ever since Lincoln, or at least since FDR and his (successful) threat to pack the SCOTUS with extra Justices in order to pass portions of his Great Society plan that were blatantly unconstitutional and over which the then-current SCOTUS/Justices in the majority were not willing to allow to pass judicial muster. The SCOTUS caved to FDR, or we might have 14 or more SCOTUS Justices today rather than 9.
Sortof. The "switch in time that saved nine" decision was written before FDR proposed his bill, though announced after its proposal and the President's fireside chat. FDR attempted to pack the court by proposing a bill that said the President could appoint a justice for every existing justice over the age of 70 -- so there would be 9 fixed seats, with an additional seat for every one of the nine which were currently over 70. So essentially as justices retired, the court would shrink back to 9, and as they got older, it would increase in size again. This bill was, technically legal because the US Constitution doesn't set a number of justices on the Courts. Was FDR successful? Yes and no. The specific legislation he proposed was roundly criticized by both parties and was obstructed (by a Democrat) in a Senate committee, and ultimately was defeated. The court packing failed, but Roosevelt ultimately achieved his aims, as one of the justices started voting to uphold some of the New Deal legislation ("The switch in time that saved nine" mentioned above), and within a few years enough justices had retired or died that Roosevelt was able to get his majority anyway.
Sounds like you got your self locked into a shit storm. This is 100% your fault. People doing the same type of work as you get by using other tools. Just because you locked yourself into that toolset does not mean no one else can do that work without those tools. There are tools that exist in Linux that do almost everything you need. No they aren't the SPECIFIC tools you mentioned.
The alternatives are usually INFERIOR tools to the industry standard, not just "different." GIMP, for instance, doesn't hold a candle to Photoshop. And I've yet to see a movie editor under Linux that is anywhere as close to quality commercial editors as GIMP is to Photoshop.
You argument makes you look really dumb. You locked yourself into a way of doing something and now all of a sudden you have no alternatives, and somehow that's the fault of Linux?
Most people don't care whose fault it is. Fault doesn't matter. What matters is what platforms the programs they need to run are supported under.
As for games, yea Linux does not have great gaming, so what.
They probably didn't pay their lawyers enough either, thats a surefire way to make the American courts come down like a ton of bricks on your head! Lawyers gotta get their cash.
The courts don't particularly care how, when, or where you pay your lawyers. They're overworked enough as it is, do you think the judge cared about the details of the financial agreement with the lawyers?
What they did care about was whether the videos Gawker violated Hogan's rights. And you'd better believe they cared a lot when Gawker ignored court orders. They tend to come down hard on people who do that. Gawker dug its own grave.
Wrong. The First does not say 'the goverment shall have no involvement in any freedom of speech issues', it says 'Congress shall make no law...'. The Courts are not Congress, and the Courts were not created by Congress, and the Courts are not controlled by Congress,
The reason the First says that is that the courts do not -create- law. There's no reason for the First Amendment to say that "Congress and the Courts shall make no law.." because that's not the courts' function. They can certainly rule on whether laws that Congress created conflict with the First Amendment and strike them down if needed.
that in the future we would indeed have the wrist watch phones and flying cars, but a high income family wouldn't be able to afford a rundown victorian era worker's cottage within an hour's commute of their job.
There's plenty of "space" out there. The reason that rundown cottage is so expensive is that SO MANY people want to live in a very small area. They don't want to live in Bumfuck, West Virginia, or Hopeless, Arkansas. They want to live in New York, San Francisco, Austin, Seattle, basically the hot centers of activity where the jobs are. "Space" is not that scarce of a resource, but "space near this particular city center" is. The larger the demand grows for a very limited supply, the more expensive that supply will be. If there's an enormous demand for housing in a specific area, then that housing is going to be expensive. Unless you constrain the prices with price controls (which have a whole host of other unpleasant side effects), that's the way it's going to be.
Flying cars are nothing compared to the achievement (good or bad) of completely rewriting basic rules of economics.
Slashdot Mirror
You can think SJWs are total trash and still think Milo is an idiot, you know.
He shifts positions depending on whatever is going to get him a lot of attention. Before Gamegate he said gamers were all "pungent beta male bollock-scratchers and twelve-year-olds" but after Gamergate he's supposed to be a hero?
Then of course there's that nonsense where he said his homosexuality was a farce because he wanted the attention. Once his family "accepted" his homosexuality and just wanted him to be happy, he "got bored" with it and now he's like, totally straight. Because according to his retarted conservative canard, gay people are endlessly flattered by the media and if you want to feel oppressed, you have to be straight.
He's a fucking toolbag, a troll of the highest order, and takes that part very very seriously.
How many news stories by the supposedly professional news gatherers are festooned with copies of tweets by some random joe? Many stories are 80-90% Twitter comments.
Oh, but don't you understand? "People are saying" this nonsense. That makes it oh so relevant.
They don't realize that their "new" approaches were already tried and already failed
Maybe they've seen the last 10-20 years of Linux fragmentation and competing package managers and release THAT has been tried and failed as well.
DNF is close enough (does the same thing and accepts the same syntax) to yum that it's really just Yum 2.0
we found ways to use computers to enhance music (auto tune is just one of many such advancements)
Yeah, I don't think most people think that's an enhancement.
Why is it that a patent only gives you a few precious years to earn your money back while requiring a LOT more investment
Because there are a lot more business interests involved that need patents to expire so they can be used to make more products.
Copyright expiration let's people use old copyrighted works for free.
Really not many moneyed interests to benefit from copyright going to public domain.
This is the sort of thing people on slashdot always say until someone rips of open source code without giving changes back...
Getting annoyed at that is entirely in line with the original poster's "Human rights > right to profit" assertion.
I think the biggest issue is the expansion of 'IP'. Culture builds on what comes before it, it always has and always will. However in 'modern' times we (or more specifically companies) keep trying to lock culture away behind walls of laws about 'IP'.
The thing I hate the most about 'IP' is right in the name -- it's now treated as a piece of physical property, property that the owners have an absolute, indefinite right to.
Re: copying and success, he did the giveaway albums after the multi-platinum record and before the Hollywood soundtracks so... I don't really understand what you're trying to say?
He's trying to say that Trent is being hypocritical. That "it was ok when I did it, but not when you do it." He's outright encouraged fans to "copy" because he wanted them to screw over his label, but he can't stand it if others do it.
He did some work for movies as well. His soundtrack to the Social Network was quite effective and he shared a Best Score Academy Award with Atticus Ross.
Plus, the song he wrote for The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo makes for one of the better music videos I've seen.
That's kind of depressing, I mean, didn't he release the STEMs of his music for free so anyone could remix it? Has Apple rotted your brain Trent? Are you an ignorant, greedy old man now?
It's called being a "sell-out" by abandoning your earlier ideals, and it happens to lot of people who were once young rebels in the music industry.
The main reason so far as I know why unions exist is that worker productivity has steadily risen since the 1950s while wages have remained stagnant.
Unions exist thanks to the rise of Communism in the early 20th Century, which happened in response to the uncontrolled Capitalism of the 1800s (see: Gilded Age). I think that the US would eventually have gone through a Russia-style revolt if not for the rise of unions to curb the worst of the excesses. The Depression and FDR came at just the right time as well -- before it was too late. Ever since the 50s, Union power has been declining, and is almost gone by now.
You link to the EFF's "zero rating" report, but is that not the exact sort of net neutrality abuse that these rules were supposed to counteract?
The real effect is that high-bandwidth Over the Top parasites like Netflix get a free ride
How are they parasites? They pay for the bandwidth they use. And so do their customers.
I think the government of Iran would be quite fine with security researchers attempting to break the security of other countries' messengers.
Atheist - believes god(s) don't exist.
Something they believe but cannot prove. I'm fine with that (I'm atheist/agnostic myself) but lets not pretend that aren't a shit-ton of atheists who assert with a fiery zeal of True Belief that there Is. No. God.
[1] Paging whipslash - if you happen to read this. It'd be cool to have better thread filtering. We used to just be able to set the threshold to a number (-1 to 5) and read all comments at or above that number. Much simpler IMO. Thanks!
I'd like a option to not only collapse -1 threads, but to not see any responses to those threads either. Have them totally collapsed together into one line.
That's so I not only have to see super-troll posts, I don't see the replies of people who ought to know better and quote and respond to the original troll post. Even on moderated boards, that nonsense will make stuff get out of hand and hard to sort through as well.
I think the point that several people were trying to make to him is that sometimes having a good point scattered throughout a post doesn't make up for the post being full of ridiculously crazy shit. As in "this still is so off-the-wall, so stereotypical, I'm pretty sure I'm just being trolled for kicks."
Seriously? Who believes anything the NSA says at this point?
Well, when they say that IoT is going to be a security nightmare, and they think the NSA will be able to exploit it.. well I trust that they're telling the truth on that.
Arguably, ever since Lincoln, or at least since FDR and his (successful) threat to pack the SCOTUS with extra Justices in order to pass portions of his Great Society plan that were blatantly unconstitutional and over which the then-current SCOTUS/Justices in the majority were not willing to allow to pass judicial muster. The SCOTUS caved to FDR, or we might have 14 or more SCOTUS Justices today rather than 9.
Sortof. The "switch in time that saved nine" decision was written before FDR proposed his bill, though announced after its proposal and the President's fireside chat. FDR attempted to pack the court by proposing a bill that said the President could appoint a justice for every existing justice over the age of 70 -- so there would be 9 fixed seats, with an additional seat for every one of the nine which were currently over 70. So essentially as justices retired, the court would shrink back to 9, and as they got older, it would increase in size again. This bill was, technically legal because the US Constitution doesn't set a number of justices on the Courts. Was FDR successful? Yes and no. The specific legislation he proposed was roundly criticized by both parties and was obstructed (by a Democrat) in a Senate committee, and ultimately was defeated. The court packing failed, but Roosevelt ultimately achieved his aims, as one of the justices started voting to uphold some of the New Deal legislation ("The switch in time that saved nine" mentioned above), and within a few years enough justices had retired or died that Roosevelt was able to get his majority anyway.
Sounds like you got your self locked into a shit storm. This is 100% your fault. People doing the same type of work as you get by using other tools. Just because you locked yourself into that toolset does not mean no one else can do that work without those tools. There are tools that exist in Linux that do almost everything you need. No they aren't the SPECIFIC tools you mentioned.
The alternatives are usually INFERIOR tools to the industry standard, not just "different." GIMP, for instance, doesn't hold a candle to Photoshop. And I've yet to see a movie editor under Linux that is anywhere as close to quality commercial editors as GIMP is to Photoshop.
You argument makes you look really dumb. You locked yourself into a way of doing something and now all of a sudden you have no alternatives, and somehow that's the fault of Linux?
Most people don't care whose fault it is. Fault doesn't matter. What matters is what platforms the programs they need to run are supported under.
As for games, yea Linux does not have great gaming, so what.
What a rebuttal!
What would stop them? Community uproar? HA!
The people who don't like systemd have always greatly overestimated the amount of "community outrage" there actually is.
They probably didn't pay their lawyers enough either, thats a surefire way to make the American courts come down like a ton of bricks on your head! Lawyers gotta get their cash.
The courts don't particularly care how, when, or where you pay your lawyers. They're overworked enough as it is, do you think the judge cared about the details of the financial agreement with the lawyers?
What they did care about was whether the videos Gawker violated Hogan's rights.
And you'd better believe they cared a lot when Gawker ignored court orders. They tend to come down hard on people who do that.
Gawker dug its own grave.
Wrong. The First does not say 'the goverment shall have no involvement in any freedom of speech issues', it says 'Congress shall make no law...'. The Courts are not Congress, and the Courts were not created by Congress, and the Courts are not controlled by Congress,
The reason the First says that is that the courts do not -create- law. There's no reason for the First Amendment to say that "Congress and the Courts shall make no law.." because that's not the courts' function. They can certainly rule on whether laws that Congress created conflict with the First Amendment and strike them down if needed.
that in the future we would indeed have the wrist watch phones and flying cars, but a high income family wouldn't be able to afford a rundown victorian era worker's cottage within an hour's commute of their job.
There's plenty of "space" out there. The reason that rundown cottage is so expensive is that SO MANY people want to live in a very small area. They don't want to live in Bumfuck, West Virginia, or Hopeless, Arkansas. They want to live in New York, San Francisco, Austin, Seattle, basically the hot centers of activity where the jobs are. "Space" is not that scarce of a resource, but "space near this particular city center" is. The larger the demand grows for a very limited supply, the more expensive that supply will be. If there's an enormous demand for housing in a specific area, then that housing is going to be expensive. Unless you constrain the prices with price controls (which have a whole host of other unpleasant side effects), that's the way it's going to be.
Flying cars are nothing compared to the achievement (good or bad) of completely rewriting basic rules of economics.