Orchestrating overthrows are the very description of indirect control. Pretty much all you're guaranteed is losing the previous regime. US geopolitical history is rife with case after case of the 'solution' being worse than the 'problem' even in terms of purely US interests. In case you haven't been paying attention, this includes Afghanistan, and probably will include Iraq.
Direct control, regardless of your desire to spin things, requires an unmitigated ability to enact and enforce laws (which results in the ability to levy and collect taxes, manipulate other tangible and intangible assets, regulate industries and social interactions, etc.).
The Romans directly administered their holdings. Granted, they allowed many local authorities to have their own laws, even their own taxes, in addition to the Roman laws and taxes, but the Roman laws and taxes always had precedence or the local Praetor would get some buff guys with swords to go door to door and set things right. Back then it wasn't loud music, sleep deprivation, and simulated drowning either, it meant crucifixion. Miles and miles of whomever dared oppose Rome lined up on roads moaning and writhing in the worst and most painful days of living death imaginable. Yeah, we're totally like that. Can't believe I didn't see it before.
The American empire, such as it is, is only analogous to Rome in its scope, not at all in nature. For one, the US has not added to its directly controlled territory since WW2 regardless of numerous opportunities to do so (and is unlikely to do so ever again without an unforseeable radical change in the US approach to geopolitics). Secondly, rather than extracting tribute from its immense sphere of influence, instead the US sends ridiculous amounts of 'aid' everywhere, undermining its own ecomony to try to buy loyalty (which hasn't worked very well) and the ability to parade around how much of a 'positive difference' we're making in the world. (Which to be fair is the preferred pissing contest of all first world nations and makes for great feel good photo ops to prop up incumbents.)
Although eclipsed by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, military operations by the US worldwide are largely humanitarian. Task forces are routinely sent in to assist with recovery efforts internationally for major disasters like earthquakes, tsunamis, and hurricanes/cyclones. Everybody seems content to hate US military, its size, capacity, and deployment until they're stuck on a roof surrounded by some species of the Crocodilia order, then it's 'oh thank you brave American soldiers whom we previously hated for no reason other than that was the popular opinion to hold'.
If the Romans were running the US, we would have probably done what Patton had wanted, attacked the Soviet Union immediately following the defeat of Germany and Japan, nuked the Russians years before they could have developed the same capacity, bypassed the Cold War and its contingent proxy wars in Asia, and the world really would be a complete and total US hegemony. Then your analogy would work, but in comparison to that context, the way things are now have little direct comparison to the way the Romans operated during and after the lifetime of Julius Caesar.
What is so lacking? Spine AKA 'political will'. Muslim minorities are much larger and growing much faster in Europe than the US, and Europeans are afraid to poke much at them even legitimately or else be labelled 'reactionary bigots' or worse 'American lapdogs' not only by the muslims but also other Europeans who are too progressive to care about people bombing trains.
On the one had, you are completely right, a lot of wholly innocent people are going to be put through a wringer because they did something that might have the appearance of impropriety. That's bad. However, all that data is going to contain the operations of some malicious organizations. Using that data to disrupt and prosecute will have some benefit. It just remains to be seen whether this is a net positive or net negative. And with Europeans rolling over (like Spain, 'oh you bombed us? We give up! Withdraw everybody!') and ignoring problems for political reasons, they brought this invasion of privacy on themselves. This whole thing is probably happening because segments of the EU government secretly want the US to both fix things and take the blame too. It's win-win for them.
I'd like to know in what universe people who are wondering whether or not to use Linux base their decision on whether there's a booth at the local animu con. After all, unless they read/., go to the con, or have friends who do, how would they even know?
Aside from looking at pathetic benchmarks, the only background to my own negative opinion of Atom-based systems has been an experience I had at a friend's wedding. They had some pissant Atom netbook running some linux distro, and it was running a playlist of music in XMMS (IIRC). It was skipping. I mean seriously, if you can't decode some compressed music, go home. Besides, who wants to feed the Intel beast if they can avoid it? If you're looking for efficiency over performance, get a Via.
Your first example is an interesting thought experiment, except that it virtually never happens. People don't make the mistake of centralizing questionable material. Keygens are almost always stand-alone, and consequently spread like the wind through more methods than just the internet. (Plus, if they weren't stand-alone, where would all the sweet chiptunes go?)
I doubt the soundness of thought of your second position as well. You actually allude to the weakness yourself, but to expand it, just because you know the dangers of the internet's 'bad part of town' does not mean that Joe Jackass who really wants a free copy of MADDEN TENNNGH knows or cares about such dangers. What acts as a deterrent to a careful technician is not going to act as a deterrent to most people, even most technicians. I've worked in support for about a decade, and I take a 'I ain't afraid of no ghosts!' attitude toward such matters. I know how to recover from basically any malware assault, so I kind of take it as a challenge.
This doesn't sound like that big a deal to me, except for the delay in actually delivering the service. I would see $60/month for 10GB as a pretty competitive plan. After all, I wouldn't think too many people would be using this as their primary means of internet access, and for speed reasons I doubt people are going to want it much for torrents or things of that nature, so why worry about a cap of 10 GB/mo? If I had the money right now, which I don't, and if this weren't Verizon, which I hate for other reasons/experiences, I would very seriously consider buying into this scheme.
On the other hand, how can they call any capped thing "unlimited"? How would they not end up in court for some kind of false advertising or breach of contract?
I love how you want to put down people for some standard of intellect while posting something full of spelling typos. Also 'ignorant' cannot be a plural noun. Or were you trying to say 'ignorance'? (Which would be just as bad, not being parallel.) In any case, you have lost all credibility to insult the intelligence of others.
It's people like you that make me wish I'd registered when I started reading in the 90s instead of just to find out where the 10 year anniversary party was.
Exactly, I get what I can from what's left of over-the-air TV, and get most of what I want through things like Netflix, Hulu, Google Video, etc. Screw cable/satellite and their extreme parasitism. None of my money goes to them.
It's like you're saying 'entropy always increases in a closed system' except we're not talking about a closed system. What you say is true, but does not apply to the specific context of intellectual property. Public domain material is, within its own context, fully free, and there is no way that it can in of itself lead to tyranny either.
You should stop using sites that have obnoxious ads. People who run sites make decisions based on hits, and if the hits don't drop off, they'll make things worse and worse.
In otherwise functional nations (not broken ones like Somalia or North Korea), daily life is pretty similar for people who tow the line. There really cannot be too much dissimilarity between the humdrum of the average worker between equivalent societies. People eat, work, commute, sleep, etc.
Where societies diverge is usually in how they deal with problems and people who don't tow the line for whatever reason. That's where China becomes a scary place... nothing says oppression quite like killing a dissident with hours of torture by cattle prod... vaginally. (Source of that is somewhere in this really, really long series.)
China would appear to me to meet the definition of a fascist state more than it does a communist state. The Chinese government is single-party, authoritarian, nationalistic, and while it plays lip service to old communist tropes like class struggle, in point of fact it has increased the stratification of its society into classes radically over the last two decades. It plays host to a large contingent of corporations that are hybrids of state and private control, and it manipulates its society through direct and active control of religious institutions and public discourse.
What is with people whining about AdBlock all the time? OH NOES TEH ADZ@!1!One. Is it really that big a deal? Thanks to my Slashdot obsession and excellent karma, I have the option to disable ads on Slashdot natively, but I don't even use the option. Why do people care so much about little images trying to sell things?
A genetic predisposition is not in of itself an action. I myself am unashamedly bisexual, but I have not had sexual contact with other men. That's a personal decision (mostly sourced in the convenience of taking the easy way out with regard to my family and how they would react). Genes may determine to whom you're attracted, but ultimately people decide for themselves how to act on that attraction.
I do support gay marriage without any reservations, and think that there is no reason why GLBTs should be hindered from living the way their genes lean them because they are within the realm of consenting adults. However, there are less savory applications of this scenario like pedophilia, or as in this case, violence. There are genetic predispositions toward actions that are and should remain illegal. It may be uncomfortable for genetic pedophiles and the violence-inclined, but so be it.
Slashdot Mirror
Orchestrating overthrows are the very description of indirect control. Pretty much all you're guaranteed is losing the previous regime. US geopolitical history is rife with case after case of the 'solution' being worse than the 'problem' even in terms of purely US interests. In case you haven't been paying attention, this includes Afghanistan, and probably will include Iraq.
Direct control, regardless of your desire to spin things, requires an unmitigated ability to enact and enforce laws (which results in the ability to levy and collect taxes, manipulate other tangible and intangible assets, regulate industries and social interactions, etc.).
The Romans directly administered their holdings. Granted, they allowed many local authorities to have their own laws, even their own taxes, in addition to the Roman laws and taxes, but the Roman laws and taxes always had precedence or the local Praetor would get some buff guys with swords to go door to door and set things right. Back then it wasn't loud music, sleep deprivation, and simulated drowning either, it meant crucifixion. Miles and miles of whomever dared oppose Rome lined up on roads moaning and writhing in the worst and most painful days of living death imaginable. Yeah, we're totally like that. Can't believe I didn't see it before.
The American empire, such as it is, is only analogous to Rome in its scope, not at all in nature. For one, the US has not added to its directly controlled territory since WW2 regardless of numerous opportunities to do so (and is unlikely to do so ever again without an unforseeable radical change in the US approach to geopolitics). Secondly, rather than extracting tribute from its immense sphere of influence, instead the US sends ridiculous amounts of 'aid' everywhere, undermining its own ecomony to try to buy loyalty (which hasn't worked very well) and the ability to parade around how much of a 'positive difference' we're making in the world. (Which to be fair is the preferred pissing contest of all first world nations and makes for great feel good photo ops to prop up incumbents.)
Although eclipsed by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, military operations by the US worldwide are largely humanitarian. Task forces are routinely sent in to assist with recovery efforts internationally for major disasters like earthquakes, tsunamis, and hurricanes/cyclones. Everybody seems content to hate US military, its size, capacity, and deployment until they're stuck on a roof surrounded by some species of the Crocodilia order, then it's 'oh thank you brave American soldiers whom we previously hated for no reason other than that was the popular opinion to hold'.
If the Romans were running the US, we would have probably done what Patton had wanted, attacked the Soviet Union immediately following the defeat of Germany and Japan, nuked the Russians years before they could have developed the same capacity, bypassed the Cold War and its contingent proxy wars in Asia, and the world really would be a complete and total US hegemony. Then your analogy would work, but in comparison to that context, the way things are now have little direct comparison to the way the Romans operated during and after the lifetime of Julius Caesar.
What is so lacking? Spine AKA 'political will'. Muslim minorities are much larger and growing much faster in Europe than the US, and Europeans are afraid to poke much at them even legitimately or else be labelled 'reactionary bigots' or worse 'American lapdogs' not only by the muslims but also other Europeans who are too progressive to care about people bombing trains.
On the one had, you are completely right, a lot of wholly innocent people are going to be put through a wringer because they did something that might have the appearance of impropriety. That's bad. However, all that data is going to contain the operations of some malicious organizations. Using that data to disrupt and prosecute will have some benefit. It just remains to be seen whether this is a net positive or net negative. And with Europeans rolling over (like Spain, 'oh you bombed us? We give up! Withdraw everybody!') and ignoring problems for political reasons, they brought this invasion of privacy on themselves. This whole thing is probably happening because segments of the EU government secretly want the US to both fix things and take the blame too. It's win-win for them.
Let the downvoting begin.
I'd like to know in what universe people who are wondering whether or not to use Linux base their decision on whether there's a booth at the local animu con. After all, unless they read /., go to the con, or have friends who do, how would they even know?
Aside from looking at pathetic benchmarks, the only background to my own negative opinion of Atom-based systems has been an experience I had at a friend's wedding. They had some pissant Atom netbook running some linux distro, and it was running a playlist of music in XMMS (IIRC). It was skipping. I mean seriously, if you can't decode some compressed music, go home. Besides, who wants to feed the Intel beast if they can avoid it? If you're looking for efficiency over performance, get a Via.
Oh snap!
Your first example is an interesting thought experiment, except that it virtually never happens. People don't make the mistake of centralizing questionable material. Keygens are almost always stand-alone, and consequently spread like the wind through more methods than just the internet. (Plus, if they weren't stand-alone, where would all the sweet chiptunes go?)
I doubt the soundness of thought of your second position as well. You actually allude to the weakness yourself, but to expand it, just because you know the dangers of the internet's 'bad part of town' does not mean that Joe Jackass who really wants a free copy of MADDEN TENNNGH knows or cares about such dangers. What acts as a deterrent to a careful technician is not going to act as a deterrent to most people, even most technicians. I've worked in support for about a decade, and I take a 'I ain't afraid of no ghosts!' attitude toward such matters. I know how to recover from basically any malware assault, so I kind of take it as a challenge.
Oh ho ho. Super.
This doesn't sound like that big a deal to me, except for the delay in actually delivering the service. I would see $60/month for 10GB as a pretty competitive plan. After all, I wouldn't think too many people would be using this as their primary means of internet access, and for speed reasons I doubt people are going to want it much for torrents or things of that nature, so why worry about a cap of 10 GB/mo? If I had the money right now, which I don't, and if this weren't Verizon, which I hate for other reasons/experiences, I would very seriously consider buying into this scheme.
On the other hand, how can they call any capped thing "unlimited"? How would they not end up in court for some kind of false advertising or breach of contract?
I love how you want to put down people for some standard of intellect while posting something full of spelling typos. Also 'ignorant' cannot be a plural noun. Or were you trying to say 'ignorance'? (Which would be just as bad, not being parallel.) In any case, you have lost all credibility to insult the intelligence of others.
It's people like you that make me wish I'd registered when I started reading in the 90s instead of just to find out where the 10 year anniversary party was.
Kekeke.
That makes sense, since we're all such big dicks.
Exactly, I get what I can from what's left of over-the-air TV, and get most of what I want through things like Netflix, Hulu, Google Video, etc. Screw cable/satellite and their extreme parasitism. None of my money goes to them.
This. How does the GP have such a low UID and not do it?
It's like you're saying 'entropy always increases in a closed system' except we're not talking about a closed system. What you say is true, but does not apply to the specific context of intellectual property. Public domain material is, within its own context, fully free, and there is no way that it can in of itself lead to tyranny either.
You should stop using sites that have obnoxious ads. People who run sites make decisions based on hits, and if the hits don't drop off, they'll make things worse and worse.
Why give obnoxious sites any traffic? That will only encourage the practice.
Wooooooosh!
In otherwise functional nations (not broken ones like Somalia or North Korea), daily life is pretty similar for people who tow the line. There really cannot be too much dissimilarity between the humdrum of the average worker between equivalent societies. People eat, work, commute, sleep, etc.
Where societies diverge is usually in how they deal with problems and people who don't tow the line for whatever reason. That's where China becomes a scary place... nothing says oppression quite like killing a dissident with hours of torture by cattle prod... vaginally. (Source of that is somewhere in this really, really long series.)
China would appear to me to meet the definition of a fascist state more than it does a communist state. The Chinese government is single-party, authoritarian, nationalistic, and while it plays lip service to old communist tropes like class struggle, in point of fact it has increased the stratification of its society into classes radically over the last two decades. It plays host to a large contingent of corporations that are hybrids of state and private control, and it manipulates its society through direct and active control of religious institutions and public discourse.
It's sad but yes.
What is with people whining about AdBlock all the time? OH NOES TEH ADZ@!1!One. Is it really that big a deal? Thanks to my Slashdot obsession and excellent karma, I have the option to disable ads on Slashdot natively, but I don't even use the option. Why do people care so much about little images trying to sell things?
A genetic predisposition is not in of itself an action. I myself am unashamedly bisexual, but I have not had sexual contact with other men. That's a personal decision (mostly sourced in the convenience of taking the easy way out with regard to my family and how they would react). Genes may determine to whom you're attracted, but ultimately people decide for themselves how to act on that attraction.
I do support gay marriage without any reservations, and think that there is no reason why GLBTs should be hindered from living the way their genes lean them because they are within the realm of consenting adults. However, there are less savory applications of this scenario like pedophilia, or as in this case, violence. There are genetic predispositions toward actions that are and should remain illegal. It may be uncomfortable for genetic pedophiles and the violence-inclined, but so be it.
I support this view whole-heartedly. 'Intellectual property' creates artificial scarcity.