The cameras arent about deterrence or consolidation. In fact, these cameras dont have to be connected to the police. All that matters is the perception they are. They are just there to get kids used to the idea of having cameras watching them, and having those cameras connected to the police.
What once was unthinkable will become commonplace. The first few years, kids will rebel, maybe even take down a camera or two, obscure its picture, that sort of thing. Given enough time, the kids are sufficiently inured to the cameras, and they wont even see them anymore.
Kids that dont notice cameras will grow to be adults that dont notice cameras. Thats the whole point of this exercise. Get em while their young.
"The only thing that matters whether it's correct or not." No, the only thing that matters is if the truth can be told, or smothered by a small, powerful group that wields veto power. The truth is great, but will they print it?
It was set up to fail from the very beginning. Its no secret that every power in the American government wants more illegals. The republicans want more cheap labor. The democrats want more poor voters. This fence was never more than distraction. Just a way for government to pretend they are doing something, while actually doing nothing.
Slightly off topic. How do "terrorist" groups get their information out? How does a group like "earth liberation front" get out a message that they just set fire to a factory, or carried out some other action?
It seems to me these people are just as highly motivated as the leakers to stay anonymous. They must have some method of communicating their actions that both gets the word out and keeps them private. Maybe leakers will have to start using that method, if friendly judges are going to keep shutting down domains that is.
I think you are ascribing motives to this 90% that just arent true. People infringe copyright because they want the item, but dont want to pay for it. They arent trying to strike a blow for intellectual freedom, they just want free stuff is all. No nobility here, no social mandate. Just people that want stuff without paying for it.
I've found that Hotmail doesn't work too well with Opera either. And a change in the user agent string doesn't help.
The only way to reply to messages is to choose "plain text" instead of rich text. Rich text is the default, but you are not able to type anything. So, choose plain text. Except that when you do that, a random half of the time, Hotmail erases your entire message.
In order to use Hotmail with any ability with Opera, Ive had to develop a several step workaround, just to reply to email. Thats one (more) reason why the upcoming Yahoo/MS merger worries me. If Yahoo mail goes the way of Hotmail, my workaround will move from occasional to every single damn time.
I ask this question every time I see a "patents/copyrights/etc should be limited to X years" debate. The question is, what right do you have to limit me benefitting from my work?
If I create a something, Its mine. I created it. I should be able to benefit from my own creativity for as short or as long a time as I see fit. If I want to live off that creativity the rest of my life, I shall do so. If I want to will that right to my children and their children, I shall do so.
What right does anybody have, even/.ers, to tell me that I can only benefit from my work for 5, 10, or X amount of years?
Public good? I am under no obligation to give away my work just because the public finds it useful. If the public finds my product useful enough to buy when it is one year old, they pay for it; but when it is 11 years old, it is still useful, but now they dont have to pay for it? Sounds like the perfect workers paradise. Unless you are a producer of course.
"balance societal benefits"? Screw societal benefits. I don't utilize my creativity for the good of some nebulous "society". If society wants my creation, they can pay me for it. As long as the continue to want it, I should be able to sell it exclusively.
Lets be clear here. Causing patents to expire is nothing less than legalized, government approved, theft.
What right does any/.er, any government, anybody at all, have to steal my work?
Slashdot Mirror
What once was unthinkable will become commonplace. The first few years, kids will rebel, maybe even take down a camera or two, obscure its picture, that sort of thing. Given enough time, the kids are sufficiently inured to the cameras, and they wont even see them anymore.
Kids that dont notice cameras will grow to be adults that dont notice cameras. Thats the whole point of this exercise. Get em while their young.
I'm {rolls dice} very sad to hear this.
It was set up to fail from the very beginning. Its no secret that every power in the American government wants more illegals. The republicans want more cheap labor. The democrats want more poor voters. This fence was never more than distraction. Just a way for government to pretend they are doing something, while actually doing nothing.
It seems to me these people are just as highly motivated as the leakers to stay anonymous. They must have some method of communicating their actions that both gets the word out and keeps them private. Maybe leakers will have to start using that method, if friendly judges are going to keep shutting down domains that is.
Yet again, /. posts a story from ars technica. You're slipping Zonk!
I think you are ascribing motives to this 90% that just arent true. People infringe copyright because they want the item, but dont want to pay for it. They arent trying to strike a blow for intellectual freedom, they just want free stuff is all. No nobility here, no social mandate. Just people that want stuff without paying for it.
The only way to reply to messages is to choose "plain text" instead of rich text. Rich text is the default, but you are not able to type anything. So, choose plain text. Except that when you do that, a random half of the time, Hotmail erases your entire message.
In order to use Hotmail with any ability with Opera, Ive had to develop a several step workaround, just to reply to email. Thats one (more) reason why the upcoming Yahoo/MS merger worries me. If Yahoo mail goes the way of Hotmail, my workaround will move from occasional to every single damn time.
If I create a something, Its mine. I created it. I should be able to benefit from my own creativity for as short or as long a time as I see fit. If I want to live off that creativity the rest of my life, I shall do so. If I want to will that right to my children and their children, I shall do so.
What right does anybody have, even /.ers, to tell me that I can only benefit from my work for 5, 10, or X amount of years?
Public good? I am under no obligation to give away my work just because the public finds it useful. If the public finds my product useful enough to buy when it is one year old, they pay for it; but when it is 11 years old, it is still useful, but now they dont have to pay for it? Sounds like the perfect workers paradise. Unless you are a producer of course.
"balance societal benefits"? Screw societal benefits. I don't utilize my creativity for the good of some nebulous "society". If society wants my creation, they can pay me for it. As long as the continue to want it, I should be able to sell it exclusively.
Lets be clear here. Causing patents to expire is nothing less than legalized, government approved, theft.
What right does any /.er, any government, anybody at all, have to steal my work?