I'm aware that this is a nigh-useless comment, but I had to express my joy (and to a lesser extent, concern) that this was modded "Redundant", and not "Troll" or "Flamebait".
The examples of restrictions that you use all refer to illegal things. You've compared P2P to child porn. This is a sad thing.
The restrictions on aerosol cans were placed there by the government.
Comcast blocking/throttling illegal things is one debate, but deciding to hinder one type of traffic because they don't like it is a different issue.
ISPs, when offering unlimited service, especially considering that they like to claim is unlimited because nothing is blocked, not unlimited bandwidth -- so they can get away with throttling, should not be allowed to hinder things they don't like without legal grounds for doing so.
They destroy like an angry mob, taking innocent people and property down with their fits.
They have the intelligence and moral values of an angry mob, lynching and burning anyone or anything in the way of their goal. ...and think like a few very greedy and self-centered individuals with a lot of power.
I know you're joking, but I'm getting rather annoyed with the government seeming like they're doing something smart, then turning around and taking a big crap all over their reputation.
"So if you drive your car on a public road the car becomes public property?"
No, but try putting up road blocks, and forcing people who drive certain kinds of vehicles to drive in lanes with much lower speed limits. You can't do things like that on a public roadway unless you're the government...or a contracted worker or prison inmate.
It seems that these days people are very short-sighted, and paying a one time $4000 fee (plus small electric fees) will scare them away.
Nevermind gas leaking that much out of their wallets in a few months, average Joe won't think clear enough for this to catch on quick.
Well, I could always be wrong, and hope I am, but people and their actions have made me jaded over the years.
"The RIAA wants to restate this as 'Better to make all eleven persons pay than to let one innocent man off the hook.'"
You know, at first I was going to say that you likely meant "Better to make all eleven persons pay than to let one guilty man off the hook.", but on further consideration I've decided that your first statement may have been more correct after all.
Try to keep in mind, veganboyjosh, it's not quite like people stealing pizzas from you. Rather, it's akin to you owning a bookstore and people coming in, copying the books, and then leaving. You lose nothing, but gain nothing either.
I'm not making a point to side either way at this point, just to point out this inconsistency.
I feel his actions were completely justified, even the punch and the pepper spray. The thing is, she bit him.
He was very polite and leaving emotions out of it far longer than I think he should have been. He gave her grace because she was young and small. She got more than her fair share of warnings and patience, and she got what she deserved.
...
A more objective way of looking at it, his job is to get her to the courthouse/jail/whatever. The pepper spray seems excessive, but he was giving as much pressure to her arms as he likely could without potentially injuring her. The next step of the ladder is pepper spray. Lucky for the girl, that was enough.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm aware that this is a nigh-useless comment, but I had to express my joy (and to a lesser extent, concern) that this was modded "Redundant", and not "Troll" or "Flamebait".
The examples of restrictions that you use all refer to illegal things. You've compared P2P to child porn. This is a sad thing.
The restrictions on aerosol cans were placed there by the government.
Comcast blocking/throttling illegal things is one debate, but deciding to hinder one type of traffic because they don't like it is a different issue.
ISPs, when offering unlimited service, especially considering that they like to claim is unlimited because nothing is blocked, not unlimited bandwidth -- so they can get away with throttling, should not be allowed to hinder things they don't like without legal grounds for doing so.
The numbers of his add up to 18. The number of yours only add up to 8. So, obviously, he is 1 better than you. Gud Lojic 4 teh win!
"Corporations are people too!"
...and think like a few very greedy and self-centered individuals with a lot of power.
Corporations:
They destroy like an angry mob, taking innocent people and property down with their fits.
They have the intelligence and moral values of an angry mob, lynching and burning anyone or anything in the way of their goal.
I know you're joking, but I'm getting rather annoyed with the government seeming like they're doing something smart, then turning around and taking a big crap all over their reputation.
"So if you drive your car on a public road the car becomes public property?" No, but try putting up road blocks, and forcing people who drive certain kinds of vehicles to drive in lanes with much lower speed limits. You can't do things like that on a public roadway unless you're the government...or a contracted worker or prison inmate.
True indeed. They'd dug themselves a hole with all this new content that I liked to believe had made DAoC too old and patchy to be salvageable.
But, thanks to EA, it looks like we won't have a spiritual sequel to DAoC afterall.
It seems that these days people are very short-sighted, and paying a one time $4000 fee (plus small electric fees) will scare them away. Nevermind gas leaking that much out of their wallets in a few months, average Joe won't think clear enough for this to catch on quick. Well, I could always be wrong, and hope I am, but people and their actions have made me jaded over the years.
"The RIAA wants to restate this as 'Better to make all eleven persons pay than to let one innocent man off the hook.'"
You know, at first I was going to say that you likely meant "Better to make all eleven persons pay than to let one guilty man off the hook.", but on further consideration I've decided that your first statement may have been more correct after all.
Try to keep in mind, veganboyjosh, it's not quite like people stealing pizzas from you. Rather, it's akin to you owning a bookstore and people coming in, copying the books, and then leaving. You lose nothing, but gain nothing either.
I'm not making a point to side either way at this point, just to point out this inconsistency.
I'm siding with AC on this.
I feel his actions were completely justified, even the punch and the pepper spray. The thing is, she bit him.
He was very polite and leaving emotions out of it far longer than I think he should have been. He gave her grace because she was young and small. She got more than her fair share of warnings and patience, and she got what she deserved.
...
A more objective way of looking at it, his job is to get her to the courthouse/jail/whatever. The pepper spray seems excessive, but he was giving as much pressure to her arms as he likely could without potentially injuring her. The next step of the ladder is pepper spray. Lucky for the girl, that was enough.
I'm sorry. I've misquoted myself, what I meant to say was, "shit." Good Day.
My First Post, and first on article, wootles.