So not only will the law not pass a judicial review for Constitutionality meaning the good aspects of the law go bye-bye, but you'll be completely ignored by the internet anyway, which is an international construct.
Well, the bill can certainly pass. Constitutionality is not a requirement that the US Congress cares too much about. The Supreme Court DOES care about constitutionality, and they have the power to strike down certain sections of laws; they aren't limited to accepting or rejecting a whole law. So there is still a fair chance that the whole law will pass, and only the hidden camera portion of the law will stand up to a court challenge.
We would filter them the same way adult magazines are filtered. Duh. Do you see books on breast cancer with black wrappers over them? Do you see art displays that require 18+ to view them? Yes? No? Nothing would change that isnt already happening. Use common sense, people.
That's easy to do because you use the local community standard for what is acceptable. What local community standards are you going to try to apply to the international Internet?
if I am walking down the street in any city...there are laws as to what can be see publicly. People don't want their 10 year old kids looking at "moaning cum sluts" or whatever the last 12 spams I deleted were.
The irony is the proposed law would do nothing, absolutely NOTHING to solve that problem you had.
Fair enough. Why don't we start with the obvious stuff and leave the grey area stuff for later? If it never gets sorted out... big deal. it'll still be in the.com and at least the anal/horse/fetish stuff won't pop up at me whenever I misspell an URL. (unfortunately, I think the.cx in goate.cx means that it wouldn't get covered by this bill).
Leaving the grey stuff for later is an obvious invitation for lawsuits. Once you make everything illegal, then the law can be used selectively by those with a political axe to grind.
Any objections to that?, or do you object to zoning the obvious stuff too?
I object pretty strongly to moving the obvious stuff as well. It's like trying to swat a fly with a sledgehammer -- cause a lot of destruction while not solving the small problem it was aimed at.
A large problem is there are many sites that have lots of non-adult content and some adult content. I'm thinking of many community sites that allow members to put up webpages without restrictions on content. If one person has "adult" content on his site, does that then require the entire website be in the ".prn" domain?
IMHO this is no different than seducing people into a Scientology clinic with blatant misdirection, and then trapping them for hours while they forcefeed Xenu BS down their throats. The entire/. community rallies against Scientology, but rails against this reform. It's hypocritical.
At least get your facts straight. If someone walks into a Scientology clinic, they are free to leave. They're as "trapped" as I am when I get a telemarketing call. Second, the/. "community" rails against Scientology usually for their legal tactics, not for trying to trick people into believing in Xenu. The Scientology beliefs are mildly amusing.. the legal practices are nothing to laugh at.
I know you're just making a joke, but at least make a joke about something that stands a minutia of a chance of happening in reality. You can't patent paintings. You can't even come close.
Actually, most of the problems/projects in this class have to do with basic algorithm stuff. So all it really takes is someone saying, "Hey how did you do project 4?" "Oh, I just created a queue and pushed the items on as I went." And just like that, almost all the hard part of the project is done. The projects tend to be one dimensional because they are trying to teach a single concept.
I'm delighted to see that you have not only assumed me to be a crybaby
Hey, that was the face you chose to show. He merely took you at your word (and made fun of it).
but have also elected to moderate down my post
I don't think he can. I'm pretty sure that a moderator's moderation disappears once he replies to the thread he was moderating. Of course, if he was using another account, that's a way around it, but..
suspended in a web between the Trade Towers. In my opinion, a very cool shot that should have been left in (scene was shot before 9/11).
First of all, it was a pretty stupid shot, bordering on sheer cartoonishness. I might have expected that from "Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends," but not from this movie. Second, are you sure that shot was actually in the movie? The trailer was a teaser trailer -- a trailer that is made often before the movie itself, frequently having nothing to do with the movie. For a classic example, see the trailer for Godzilla(released May 1998) which came out Winter/Spring 1997. It had nothing to do with the movie, and was released just to start a buzz.
the bush administration would never be brave enough to name any enemy outright
It's not cowardice for not wanting to name an enemy outright, it's making the title broad enough to include more than a specific enemy. The current "War on Terrorism" is not a war on Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, or Afghanistan, it's a "war" against a much more vague target, allowing the administration to take far more action than a simple "down with Osama, down with Al'Quaida" would warrent.
There is a big difference between a physical addiction (such as heroin or tobacco) and a psychological addiction (such as marijuana or porn or video gaming).
Though often there is a fair amount of overlap, in that you will almost always find a psychological addition to tobacco when you have a physical addiction as well.
These are the people that our society expects to go to the NFL and get multi-million dollar contracts and get TV sponsorships. Professional sports is an extremely competative area, no pun intended. Many try for it, few can get in.
At least you didn't say "these are the people who get multi-million dollar contracts" because out of the huge number of people active in such sports, only a tiny minority get into the majors with a strong salary.
These are the people that commit crimes that get other people thrown in jail, but have it covered up or recieve wrist-spalling punishments because the greedy bastards who run this country want their almamater to kick State's ass next week, and they can't do it without the "problem case" star player.
Please provide statistics that this behavior is widespread. It might happen a very few times, but it's hardly an epidemic.
Whereas your local egotistical tech geek would probably make around 100k a year to be worked like a slave in a corporate IT department
I'll make this brief: the multi-million-dollar-contract ballplayer is far more important than the hard-working tech geek, and that's why he gets the big bucks. People care far more about what the ball player does than what the tech geek does, and when the big-league sports player screws up, far more people will notice the effects than when the tech geek screws up.
Everyone and their brother in the company either does their best to avoid you, or is looking for any excuse to kick your ass to the curb because you're such a dickweed to everyone.
Well maybe you're just doing it wrong. I have to tell people "no" rather often in my job as a sysadmin, and I've had no problems at the places I've worked at. Then again, I never saw the need of being a dickweed.
That's exactly what I said - they alienated large portions of the developers because they didn't follow the PSX's lead for the N64. Sorry if it sounded a little confusing.
Aaah.. I thought you meant the opposite.
There's a good chance that the N64 would've taken the lead from the PSX had it been a CD based system. It also wouldn't've been the same system, so I wouldn't've gotten several kickass games, so, not sure which one is better.:)
This was reportedly the reason that Square left Nintendo and produced Final Fantasy 7 for the PSX.. that along with Sony's willingness to give them more artistic freedom, at least in the American releases. Needless to say, having the Final Fantasy franchise switch to PSX (along with Square's other games) was a huge boost to Sony.
Nintendo screwed up. They alienated large portions of the developers because of a game format change (cart to CD),
Huh?? If I was a game developer, I'd be far more pissed off at Nintendo for sticking with those awful carts as long as they did. Using carts instead of CDs for the N64 was one of that platform's biggest shortcomings.
And then, Sony doesn't even feel much pain from Microsoft. Ironically, Playstation2 sales were 30% HIGHER in the XBox launch-week than one week before.
Probably because people were hanging back from buying a PS2 until they could compare it to the XBox. A lot of people waited until the next-gen consoles were released.
I was never sure if it was a mined metal or a man made alloy.
Some sort of iron-vibranium alloy. There are apparently three different forms of adamantium.. the one used in Captain America's shield, and "True Adamantium" which is apparently not quite as strong as the shield (Ultra, wolverine). Secondary Adamantium is pretty strong, but nowhere near as strong a Captain America's shield or True Adamantium.
I pulled out my 1985 "Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe" from the closet to get all of this. Really geeky, I know.
Why don't they just work WITH the people to create a vibrant, alive community rather than trying to kill off any innovation outside of their own company
Because they are the nobles and we are the peasants. We will play their games on their terms, and we'd better like it. This may not have been the attitude back at Blizzard before they were bought by Vivendi, but it's the attitude that most of the major media companies (and some major software companies) have fostered.
"Thousands of people doing the same wrong thing doesn't make it necessarily right."
Gee...and I thought we were living in a democracy (well, at least in the U.S.) when the actions of the majority (which is up for argument) do in fact make said "wrong thing" right.
First, we have to define our terms. There is a difference between something that is right, and something that is legal. Using bnetd to host your own games for titles you have bought is certainly "right" (morally). Whether it is legal or not is up in the air. The actions of the majority do not decide what is legal (in fact, I'd say the majority can't decide what is right either), the law decides what is legal. The actions of the majority can get the law changed, and that is what is necessary to make an action legal.
The ACLU is seeking an undisclosed amount of punitive and financial damages on the Blackbear family's behalf, a declaration that the school violated the student's rights, an injunction preventing the school from banning the wearing of any non-Christian religious paraphernalia and an order expunging her school record.
There's the ACLU defending the liberties of all people again! Sheesh, I love how Christians don't seem to be included in the category of "all people"
You need to read the full court complaint. The problem was that the school allowed Christian paraphernalia while banning symbols from other religions (notably Wiccan). This was Tulsa, Oklahoma -- the rights of Christians there are hardly threatened compared to others.
Slashdot Mirror
Tyler Durden was a lot more articulate as well.
Well, the bill can certainly pass. Constitutionality is not a requirement that the US Congress cares too much about. The Supreme Court DOES care about constitutionality, and they have the power to strike down certain sections of laws; they aren't limited to accepting or rejecting a whole law. So there is still a fair chance that the whole law will pass, and only the hidden camera portion of the law will stand up to a court challenge.
Actually what the browsers do is they try to look up "yahoo," and if that fails, then they try "www.yahoo.com." A rather nice feature.
That's easy to do because you use the local community standard for what is acceptable. What local community standards are you going to try to apply to the international Internet?
The irony is the proposed law would do nothing, absolutely NOTHING to solve that problem you had.
Leaving the grey stuff for later is an obvious invitation for lawsuits. Once you make everything illegal, then the law can be used selectively by those with a political axe to grind.
Any objections to that?, or do you object to zoning the obvious stuff too?
I object pretty strongly to moving the obvious stuff as well. It's like trying to swat a fly with a sledgehammer -- cause a lot of destruction while not solving the small problem it was aimed at.
A large problem is there are many sites that have lots of non-adult content and some adult content. I'm thinking of many community sites that allow members to put up webpages without restrictions on content. If one person has "adult" content on his site, does that then require the entire website be in the ".prn" domain?
At least get your facts straight. If someone walks into a Scientology clinic, they are free to leave. They're as "trapped" as I am when I get a telemarketing call. Second, the /. "community" rails against Scientology usually for their legal tactics, not for trying to trick people into believing in Xenu. The Scientology beliefs are mildly amusing.. the legal practices are nothing to laugh at.
I know you're just making a joke, but at least make a joke about something that stands a minutia of a chance of happening in reality. You can't patent paintings. You can't even come close.
No it's not, the alcoholic is addicted to the alcohol, not the taste of beer.
Porn is an addiction, looking at virtual child porn will just lead the pervent to want more and more.
No "slippery slope" arguments, please.
Apparently not very well, if your story is true.
Hey, that was the face you chose to show. He merely took you at your word (and made fun of it).
but have also elected to moderate down my post
I don't think he can. I'm pretty sure that a moderator's moderation disappears once he replies to the thread he was moderating. Of course, if he was using another account, that's a way around it, but..
First of all, it was a pretty stupid shot, bordering on sheer cartoonishness. I might have expected that from "Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends," but not from this movie. Second, are you sure that shot was actually in the movie? The trailer was a teaser trailer -- a trailer that is made often before the movie itself, frequently having nothing to do with the movie. For a classic example, see the trailer for Godzilla(released May 1998) which came out Winter/Spring 1997. It had nothing to do with the movie, and was released just to start a buzz.
It's not cowardice for not wanting to name an enemy outright, it's making the title broad enough to include more than a specific enemy. The current "War on Terrorism" is not a war on Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, or Afghanistan, it's a "war" against a much more vague target, allowing the administration to take far more action than a simple "down with Osama, down with Al'Quaida" would warrent.
Though often there is a fair amount of overlap, in that you will almost always find a psychological addition to tobacco when you have a physical addiction as well.
At least you didn't say "these are the people who get multi-million dollar contracts" because out of the huge number of people active in such sports, only a tiny minority get into the majors with a strong salary.
These are the people that commit crimes that get other people thrown in jail, but have it covered up or recieve wrist-spalling punishments because the greedy bastards who run this country want their almamater to kick State's ass next week, and they can't do it without the "problem case" star player.
Please provide statistics that this behavior is widespread. It might happen a very few times, but it's hardly an epidemic.
Whereas your local egotistical tech geek would probably make around 100k a year to be worked like a slave in a corporate IT department
I'll make this brief: the multi-million-dollar-contract ballplayer is far more important than the hard-working tech geek, and that's why he gets the big bucks. People care far more about what the ball player does than what the tech geek does, and when the big-league sports player screws up, far more people will notice the effects than when the tech geek screws up.
Everyone and their brother in the company either does their best to avoid you, or is looking for any excuse to kick your ass to the curb because you're such a dickweed to everyone.
Well maybe you're just doing it wrong. I have to tell people "no" rather often in my job as a sysadmin, and I've had no problems at the places I've worked at. Then again, I never saw the need of being a dickweed.
Aaah.. I thought you meant the opposite.
There's a good chance that the N64 would've taken the lead from the PSX had it been a CD based system. It also wouldn't've been the same system, so I wouldn't've gotten several kickass games, so, not sure which one is better. :)
This was reportedly the reason that Square left Nintendo and produced Final Fantasy 7 for the PSX.. that along with Sony's willingness to give them more artistic freedom, at least in the American releases. Needless to say, having the Final Fantasy franchise switch to PSX (along with Square's other games) was a huge boost to Sony.
Huh?? If I was a game developer, I'd be far more pissed off at Nintendo for sticking with those awful carts as long as they did. Using carts instead of CDs for the N64 was one of that platform's biggest shortcomings.
Probably because people were hanging back from buying a PS2 until they could compare it to the XBox. A lot of people waited until the next-gen consoles were released.
Some sort of iron-vibranium alloy. There are apparently three different forms of adamantium.. the one used in Captain America's shield, and "True Adamantium" which is apparently not quite as strong as the shield (Ultra, wolverine). Secondary Adamantium is pretty strong, but nowhere near as strong a Captain America's shield or True Adamantium.
I pulled out my 1985 "Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe" from the closet to get all of this. Really geeky, I know.
Because they are the nobles and we are the peasants. We will play their games on their terms, and we'd better like it. This may not have been the attitude back at Blizzard before they were bought by Vivendi, but it's the attitude that most of the major media companies (and some major software companies) have fostered.
2. Lawsuits!
Gee...and I thought we were living in a democracy (well, at least in the U.S.) when the actions of the majority (which is up for argument) do in fact make said "wrong thing" right.
First, we have to define our terms. There is a difference between something that is right, and something that is legal. Using bnetd to host your own games for titles you have bought is certainly "right" (morally). Whether it is legal or not is up in the air. The actions of the majority do not decide what is legal (in fact, I'd say the majority can't decide what is right either), the law decides what is legal. The actions of the majority can get the law changed, and that is what is necessary to make an action legal.
Heat rises, propane, even burning propane, falls. Go ahead and try it in your apartment/house.
There's the ACLU defending the liberties of all people again! Sheesh, I love how Christians don't seem to be included in the category of "all people"
You need to read the full court complaint. The problem was that the school allowed Christian paraphernalia while banning symbols from other religions (notably Wiccan). This was Tulsa, Oklahoma -- the rights of Christians there are hardly threatened compared to others.