I'm afraid you're still missing my point. You were trying to draw parallels where there are none to be drawn sufficiently analogous to be of value. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to give you a history lesson (Your apparent belief that there was only one Crusade and failure to grasp the difference between religious and economic motivators leads me to believe you might be a little light in that particular area).
Concentrate on differences in kind rather than differences of degree and maybe you'll see what I mean. Governments that practice internal repression coupled with ungoverned rapacity toward other states are not unheard-of, but scale and motivation have more effect as technology increases. A madman with a spear and a madman with a rocket launcher may be equally bent on mayhem, but their potential impact is significantly different.
It seems to me that a good way to fight the RIAA is to turn their whole numbers game on its head. Hit them with so many lawsuits that their legal strategy collapses.
Would it be possible for law schools in various countries to assemble "how to" kits that would allow average people to harass the big labels, individually or collectively, in this way? I'm not sure what grounds would be best to surpass the "nuisance" threshold and protect the litigants from charges of malicious prosecution (or whatever it might be called), but something must surely exist.
Can you imagine the drain on their financial and manpower resources if the RIAA suddenly found itself on the receiving end of 15,000 suits in 20 countries?
Would this be the same Supreme Court that pretty much spit on the Constitution in order to allow the Bush election fraud to stand, or just one very much like it?
If your questions are intended to by rhetorical and wryly ironic, they fail miserably. If they are intended seriously, they are unworthy of any answer beyond, "Get off your ass and do a little research. False analogies serve no useful purpose beyond misleading those who have no interest in delving deeply into the situation, and responding to an argument I do not make is equally misleading".
Or perhaps I should pose an illustrative question of my own: which "Crusade" do you mean, and what industrial base was extant during the Middle Ages to commit espionage against? FYI, there were at least nine Crusades occurring over a period of some 200 years, and they were essentially religious in nature. The Industrial Revolution occurred 500 years later.
The economic integration between North America and Communist China is putting us in a very dangerous position. The Chinese government has a well-documented history of utter ruthlessness, and will happily steal and duplicate every technological edge it can get. Does anybody believe even for a moment that the same people who have committed and facilitated cold-blooded mass murder on a scale we find difficult to imagine will draw the line at a little industrial espionage?
Corporations that are forcing us into closer and closer economic contact with China are making huge profits, and doing a good job of ensuring that our governments obediently facilitate economic integration. For the rest of us, this means stagnant wages and limited opportunities...all in return for access to cheap headphones, lead-poisoned toys and other gimcrackery.
The Chinese government is not our friend, and the argument that exposing them to the joy of capitalism will make their society free is exactly backwards.
All the huge communications/entertainment corporations and every government in the world have been trying for years to get control of the internet and make money off it/control it. It looks like the big push is on. The ISP's want to start throttling bandwidth and content, then raking in the cash from both ends. Governments have finally figured out that they can get what they want by bribery instead of just the threat of legislation, and so has the entertainment industry. They're all on the same page now, and all of us are squarely in their gun-sights.
It's time for those of us who value what we have here to wake up and start fighting back. The pressure is bound to get intense, and it's going to come from a lot of places. There's too much money to be made and too much power to be had in controlling the flow of information to a huge portion of the world's population.
I don't know whether the solution is technological, legal, some combination, or something completely different (like massive displays of civil disobedience, for example). But I'm utterly confident that if people don't start fighting back, we can all kiss access to unfiltered information goodbye.
"...analyzing the brain waves to determine the subject's intended activity to an accuracy of greater than 80%."
Is 80% really good enough? I'm reminded of an old joke about an artificial arm that had to be given verbal instructions through a microphone in the shoulder. A sad conclusion occurs over a misunderstanding of the words, "Bionic arm, whack it off."
I can't believe hard drive manufacturers aren't aware that the devices they built their businesses on are headed for the museum right next to buggy whips and engine cranks. So when are we going to see that big move to solid state storage? Less weight, less heat, less power, no moving parts...what's not to like?
Coupled with that often-used cause for arrest, "Driving While Black", the inevitable compromise of this data base should eventually provide wonderful marketing opportunities for companies who market their products primarily to the African American community.
Time to take ISO on that last, sad trip to the vet
on
ISO Releases OOXML FAQ
·
· Score: 1
I hadn't thought shooting oneself in the foot was fatal. In the case of the ISO and its manifestly dishonest dealings with respect to OOXML, I may be mistaken.
Exactly the self-regulation model the airlines have been getting away with for years. Look where that's gotten us. Stranded, starving, stuck in voice mail hell and grounded. Self-regulation has never been of the slightest benefit to the consumer.
So yeah, why not trust ComCast and their ilk when they say we can trust them not to rape us in the wallets in some imaginative new way? Either the "Bill of Rights" will have loopholes a whale could fit through or penalties for violating it won't match a CEO's shoeshine bill.
Regulate these assholes now, and make penalties for failure to comply really, really hurt. Something like 1% of their last quarter's net profits, increasing by 1% per day until they do as they're damned well told.
Remember this the next time the so-called "good guys" explain how the sweeping new powers they need to defeat terrorists and save all the children and puppy dogs would never be abused.
These people have a sense of entitlement coupled with an iron-clad conviction that they're right and everybody else is wrong that makes them at least as dangerous to the long-term survival of democracy as any pack of terrorists.
...those phony-cheerful, "Wow, we're so cool and so are you" voices saying crap like, "Hey, guys, we've just decided you like us sooooo much it would be really cool for us to put our prices up so you can tell all your friends what an important, expensive service you have".
As soon as my time's up, they can take a long, hard suck on my conspicuously non-Virgin friend, Darth Veiner.
Your ignorance on this matter is so profound I simply don't have time to disabuse you of it. Please do just a little research before shooting off your mouth like this. I'd suggest:
Well, given the reign of silence surrounding the sale of the Hudson's Bay Company, Alcan, and quite a few other high-profile Canadian businesses, I don't think anybody would have been surprised to see this buried on the back pages somewhere. I could be wrong, but I think it was Terry Malefski of the CBC who made a big deal of this. Initially, none of the Sun papers, the Globe and Mail or Global wanted anything to do with it.
And by the way, the allegations by the CEO that they won't be able to get major US contracts unless they sell out is false. There's a major company based in Montreal (can't remember the name, dammit) that does almost nothing else. And the allegation that the millions of taxpayer dollars given to these people was just advance payment for pictures is the purest, most unadulterated bullshit.
They get to take another kick at selling out in 30 days, when they report back to the Minister. If the press hadn't got hold of this, it would already be a done deal.
We're getting to the point where decisions made on what kind of surveillance is permitted in public and quasi-public spaces must become a moral and ethical question that goes to the heart of what we mean by democracy. If the need for security is so urgent, how can it be argued that surveillance cameras shouldn't be allowed in washrooms? Is there a better on-site location to do final assembly of a weapon than one where privacy is guaranteed?
My personal belief is that every public area protected only by occasional foot patrols and the commitment of average people to act responsibly is a metaphorical middle finger shoved in the face of all fascists and their terrorist enablers.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm afraid you're still missing my point. You were trying to draw parallels where there are none to be drawn sufficiently analogous to be of value. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to give you a history lesson (Your apparent belief that there was only one Crusade and failure to grasp the difference between religious and economic motivators leads me to believe you might be a little light in that particular area).
Concentrate on differences in kind rather than differences of degree and maybe you'll see what I mean. Governments that practice internal repression coupled with ungoverned rapacity toward other states are not unheard-of, but scale and motivation have more effect as technology increases. A madman with a spear and a madman with a rocket launcher may be equally bent on mayhem, but their potential impact is significantly different.
It seems to me that a good way to fight the RIAA is to turn their whole numbers game on its head. Hit them with so many lawsuits that their legal strategy collapses.
Would it be possible for law schools in various countries to assemble "how to" kits that would allow average people to harass the big labels, individually or collectively, in this way? I'm not sure what grounds would be best to surpass the "nuisance" threshold and protect the litigants from charges of malicious prosecution (or whatever it might be called), but something must surely exist.
Can you imagine the drain on their financial and manpower resources if the RIAA suddenly found itself on the receiving end of 15,000 suits in 20 countries?
First, I'm not a Democrat. Second, you're factually wrong. Do some research.
Would this be the same Supreme Court that pretty much spit on the Constitution in order to allow the Bush election fraud to stand, or just one very much like it?
If your questions are intended to by rhetorical and wryly ironic, they fail miserably. If they are intended seriously, they are unworthy of any answer beyond, "Get off your ass and do a little research. False analogies serve no useful purpose beyond misleading those who have no interest in delving deeply into the situation, and responding to an argument I do not make is equally misleading".
Or perhaps I should pose an illustrative question of my own: which "Crusade" do you mean, and what industrial base was extant during the Middle Ages to commit espionage against? FYI, there were at least nine Crusades occurring over a period of some 200 years, and they were essentially religious in nature. The Industrial Revolution occurred 500 years later.
The economic integration between North America and Communist China is putting us in a very dangerous position. The Chinese government has a well-documented history of utter ruthlessness, and will happily steal and duplicate every technological edge it can get. Does anybody believe even for a moment that the same people who have committed and facilitated cold-blooded mass murder on a scale we find difficult to imagine will draw the line at a little industrial espionage?
Corporations that are forcing us into closer and closer economic contact with China are making huge profits, and doing a good job of ensuring that our governments obediently facilitate economic integration. For the rest of us, this means stagnant wages and limited opportunities...all in return for access to cheap headphones, lead-poisoned toys and other gimcrackery.
The Chinese government is not our friend, and the argument that exposing them to the joy of capitalism will make their society free is exactly backwards.
This guy complaining about the current patent mess is like a skunk asking, "Who farted?"
.....that this "perpetual pay" model is Microsoft's thank you to those nice ISO people for adopting OOXML?
All the huge communications/entertainment corporations and every government in the world have been trying for years to get control of the internet and make money off it/control it. It looks like the big push is on. The ISP's want to start throttling bandwidth and content, then raking in the cash from both ends. Governments have finally figured out that they can get what they want by bribery instead of just the threat of legislation, and so has the entertainment industry. They're all on the same page now, and all of us are squarely in their gun-sights.
It's time for those of us who value what we have here to wake up and start fighting back. The pressure is bound to get intense, and it's going to come from a lot of places. There's too much money to be made and too much power to be had in controlling the flow of information to a huge portion of the world's population.
I don't know whether the solution is technological, legal, some combination, or something completely different (like massive displays of civil disobedience, for example). But I'm utterly confident that if people don't start fighting back, we can all kiss access to unfiltered information goodbye.
And that will be a very, very dangerous thing.
"...analyzing the brain waves to determine the subject's intended activity to an accuracy of greater than 80%."
Is 80% really good enough? I'm reminded of an old joke about an artificial arm that had to be given verbal instructions through a microphone in the shoulder. A sad conclusion occurs over a misunderstanding of the words, "Bionic arm, whack it off."
I can't believe hard drive manufacturers aren't aware that the devices they built their businesses on are headed for the museum right next to buggy whips and engine cranks. So when are we going to see that big move to solid state storage? Less weight, less heat, less power, no moving parts...what's not to like?
Coupled with that often-used cause for arrest, "Driving While Black", the inevitable compromise of this data base should eventually provide wonderful marketing opportunities for companies who market their products primarily to the African American community.
I hadn't thought shooting oneself in the foot was fatal. In the case of the ISO and its manifestly dishonest dealings with respect to OOXML, I may be mistaken.
That might be the truest thing I've seen on this website in a long time. And for the record, I'm not an American, so I'm not just waving the flag.
Exactly the self-regulation model the airlines have been getting away with for years. Look where that's gotten us. Stranded, starving, stuck in voice mail hell and grounded. Self-regulation has never been of the slightest benefit to the consumer.
So yeah, why not trust ComCast and their ilk when they say we can trust them not to rape us in the wallets in some imaginative new way? Either the "Bill of Rights" will have loopholes a whale could fit through or penalties for violating it won't match a CEO's shoeshine bill.
Regulate these assholes now, and make penalties for failure to comply really, really hurt. Something like 1% of their last quarter's net profits, increasing by 1% per day until they do as they're damned well told.
Remember this the next time the so-called "good guys" explain how the sweeping new powers they need to defeat terrorists and save all the children and puppy dogs would never be abused.
These people have a sense of entitlement coupled with an iron-clad conviction that they're right and everybody else is wrong that makes them at least as dangerous to the long-term survival of democracy as any pack of terrorists.
As soon as my time's up, they can take a long, hard suck on my conspicuously non-Virgin friend, Darth Veiner.
Given his track record for pointing guns in the wrong direction, perhaps we should start calling the little darlings, "Cheneys".
Your ignorance on this matter is so profound I simply don't have time to disabuse you of it. Please do just a little research before shooting off your mouth like this. I'd suggest:
http://www.psrast.org/
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/03/14/gm-foods-part-one.aspx
http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GEessays/gedanger.htm
as places to start. If you have any real interest in informing yourself about the situation, that is.
Well, given the reign of silence surrounding the sale of the Hudson's Bay Company, Alcan, and quite a few other high-profile Canadian businesses, I don't think anybody would have been surprised to see this buried on the back pages somewhere. I could be wrong, but I think it was Terry Malefski of the CBC who made a big deal of this. Initially, none of the Sun papers, the Globe and Mail or Global wanted anything to do with it.
And by the way, the allegations by the CEO that they won't be able to get major US contracts unless they sell out is false. There's a major company based in Montreal (can't remember the name, dammit) that does almost nothing else. And the allegation that the millions of taxpayer dollars given to these people was just advance payment for pictures is the purest, most unadulterated bullshit.
...they come up with a good answer to that single most important question: "Will that be metric or imperial?"
VerCom. Or maybe VtCom. I'd do some work on a logo and see what looks good. then pick the name that works best from among several alternatives.
They get to take another kick at selling out in 30 days, when they report back to the Minister. If the press hadn't got hold of this, it would already be a done deal.
We're getting to the point where decisions made on what kind of surveillance is permitted in public and quasi-public spaces must become a moral and ethical question that goes to the heart of what we mean by democracy. If the need for security is so urgent, how can it be argued that surveillance cameras shouldn't be allowed in washrooms? Is there a better on-site location to do final assembly of a weapon than one where privacy is guaranteed?
My personal belief is that every public area protected only by occasional foot patrols and the commitment of average people to act responsibly is a metaphorical middle finger shoved in the face of all fascists and their terrorist enablers.
...It looks like my ex will be good for something positive.