It's all about the relative offensive nature, so they'll all be in the same context. The idea is that if "my cunt hurts" is more offensive than "my ass hurts," then "you cunt" should be more offensive than "you ass."
In other words, just because we grow "better" crops doesn't mean we've won.
And similarly, just because we grow GE crops doesn't mean we've lost.
On many levels GE is just like antibiotics - build a better disease-killer, and all you get are better diseases.
You can't group GE crops together like this. Genetic engineering is a process, not a product. Sure one product might be bad, but the process is sound and exhaustive tests indicate that this product is too. In fact, this golden rice doesn't contain any pesticides or extra protection that normal rice doesn't already. So this product, created with a scientifically sound process, is perfectly fine under your criterion. Tell me now again why we shouldn't be supporting this whole-heartedly?
This is why the social part of the problem is so vital. Slash-and-burn techniques won't stop being used just because the crops being grown are now GE. And if those new GE foods aren't shipped to places that need them, but rather appear in supermarkets in the U.S. (fetching higher prices than the "less healthy" non-GE equivalent, of course), then we haven't achieved anything.
Both of these problems exist independently of GE food. So instead of trying to block GE food just because it isn't a perfect solution, maybe you should try to stop these other practices regardless of what food is being produced or sold.
I do the exact same thing with a free subdomain from Bizland.com.
--
Better than both: free and easy
on
Spambot Poisoner
·
· Score: 2
I use Bizland.com mail forwarding. It works the same way as the first poster's idea, but with a free subdomain. If I remember correctly, with Sneakemail you have to log onto their site every time an address gets spammed and delete/change the account. This way, all you have to do is add it to your filters, which seems to be more convenient to me.
When submitting a form, I usually give my email as theirs. For example, I've signed up RealPlayer to send as many 'product updates' as possible to support@real.com. I hope they like it. Or, I use the one mailhost garunteed never to point to a real machine, example.com.
Then there's anything@spamcheck.bizland.com, where I can change 'anything' to the name of the site I'm giving it to (see my slashdot email), and later filter all mail coming to that address if it starts getting spammed.
"Because up until very recently they haven't been really all that interested in discouraging personal piracy. Personal piracy made them the Standard and has kept them there."
This is why I doubt it will happen. You "up until very recently," but what caused it to change? If they seriously threaten software piracy, I think they'll do some serious damage to their market share.
"As for cracking it - it should be possible (just like any other software)"
Buy the subscription version, then use a full version CD-Key. Unless MS wants to actually print different versions of the CD, it would work. See the note above about the academic version of Office 2k.
I'm not trying to argue with you, but if the firewall can survive a soft-reboot, wouldn't that mean all it needs is power? IE, you can use it as a NIC, but you don't have to; and the card just thinks the system is in a perpetual process of rebooting.
As far as I can tell, it doesn't need the PCI backbone at all, just the power.. so screw IRQs, just hook it up to a phony PCI port that has nothing but power.
Dude. South Park is one of the most often pirated series on TV. Minutes after it airs you can download it online.
As long as Comedy Central's advertisers don't realize this (and they haven't seem to yet), Comedy Central is ok. I think the case will be the same with Dune; if people really want to pirate it, they will, but it won't hurt Scifi's revenue much.
But if it's been labelled porn when it's really not, then you may not be able to access it because of parental, ISP, or government restrictions.
Parents have a right to restrict access for their children. The US government does not. ISPs should not. With the money coming from porn on the net and the intense competition among ISPs, I doubt they could.
But under the dictionary definition, goatse.cx wouldn't be in ".xxx" since I'm pretty sure it's intended to sicken rather than stimulate sexually.
Indeed. So you have found a loophole. But I fall back onto my argument that just because it isn't perfect doesn't mean we shouldn't use it at all.
Because you can't control every moment of your child's life.
This makes no sense. I can't control everything, so I shouldn't try to control what I can?
Why should entire sections of the Internet be censored just because a curious child might see a nipple?
No one has successfully proven to me that simply adding a xxx TLD would result in censorship, and therefore "just because a curious child might see a nipple" is reason enough to do it.
Maybe they already have a.com (or even a free country-specific domain) and they don't want to pay for an extra domain. Maybe they don't consider their content to be "XXX" even though you do.
Perhaps for a certain period of time, owners of.com domains would have the opportunity to 'link' their.com domains to their.xxx domains and only pay for one. Anyone wondering whether or not their site is a pornographic should grab a dictionary: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement. In summary, a graphical sex ed. site would be.com, but a non-nude up-skirt site would be.xxx.
What are you talking about? This isn't software. It doesn't block anything. And if there are any legitimate sites in the porn TLD -- I've no clue why there would be -- I could make the choice not to block it quite easily. I can supervise my child, but I can also use this TLD to remove the largest risk of porn exposure on the net: commercial porn sites.
Why does it matter? If you disagree with their distinctions, you don't have to do anything. You would be able to access porn sites just as easily as you would Slashdot.
That being said, I think the distinction should be drawn with the dictionary definition: material designed or presented with the intent to stimulate sexually. This would mean that a foot fetish site with no real nudity would be pornographic, but a breast cancer site or a sex ed. site with graphical photographs of genitalia or intercourse wouldn't be.
Ok, so I guess you don't need a network or enough space on the hard drive for more than a few documents. If you need graphics, I suppose you could wait a minute after every action. God help you if you ever try to figure out any hardware problems with the mishmash of random computers you've got.
In my experience working with schools, however, a donated computer is rarely workable as-is and a lot work is put into just getting it to work at a bare minimum level. Sure, you could expend time and energy getting these old computers to work; and sure, you don't need the fastest things on the block. But in the long run I think you'll find I'm right when I say that these older computers aren't as cheap as you think and they aren't worth your time.
My problem with the.porn/.xxx TLD is that it gives the US too much power to enforce it's morals and beliefs onto other peoples. Like we don't already have that power as it is.
Who, exactly, would be forcing these other countries to filter out the porn TLD? This is just labelling that makes it easier for individuals to self-censor. If you (or another nation) don't feel that it's necessary, you don't have to do anything. The Internet will still work the same way it always did. The only people left out would be the people who don't want to see the stuff anyway.
The parent should consider talking to his or her child so that the child is able to deal with the bad things to which he or she will eventually be exposed (Internet or not).
OK, say, as a parent, I've already done this. I still don't want my children exposed to such pornographic material. Why shouldn't I, as the parent and legal guardian of a developing minor, have the right to control what my child is exposed to? Why should your freedom to sell pornography indescriminately impose on my freedom to raise my child the way I choose, especially considering that.xxx domains would still be available to those who wanted them?
Look at what has happened to DeCSS?
It has been forced underground which has effectively killed it.
You must know nothing of the Divx scene. Countless titles have been ripped and are out there if you can find them. (And it's only hard to find them because they're big, not because they're illegal.) DVD ripping software is advancing at an incredible pace; already there are DeCSS counterparts that are faster, easier and more compliant than DeCSS ever was. I don't see people in a hurry to mirror VOBDec or put it on t-shirts. DeCSS is, in fact, more popular than it would be without these lawsuits.
Why is that? Because DVD ripping is equated with piracy. DVD ripping software is equated with free speech; and by challenging DeCSS, the MPAA has pissed off a lot of people who wouldn't normally touch the stuff.
There are more problems with older computers than just their speed. Hardware upgrades are next to impossible to find. Did you know that SIMMs are more expensive than brand spanking new PC133 DIMMs? Or that a 486DX100 CPU is more expensive than a Duron? Try finding ethernet cards for those 286s. Or larger hard drives. Swaping files between computers that don't support the same floppy format is a pain. Insuring that all the same software runs the same on all computers is next to impossible. I suppose this New Deal thing would try to fix that, but then you can't run any outside Windows or Mac programs.
Really, an old computer is just as expensive as a new one, so you might as well get new ones. And despite what the politicians say about the Internet gap, a computer is a ultimately luxury device. There is no reason to believe that 'developing countries' need computers so much that they should settle for half-assed solutions. Wait a while for the technology to develop; and in the meantime, keep doing what has worked for years.
There is one very important to reconsider this ballot: it decides the fate of the nation.
The Republicans are calling fowl in Iowa and in other states, stating that every state has irregularities. Their retort is that if we raise such a fuss over Florida, why not other states; why not every state? Hey, if you want to have a recount there and the law allows it, then by all means do it. All that will happen will be a more accurate (2) and more precise (2) measurement of the will of the people who voted. In a race as tight as this, that precision matters a lot.
In '96, the race was nowhere near as tight as it is now. Even with a relatively generous margin of error, the election was accurate (2); it needn't be so precise (2).
In an election where the accuracy is in question, the precision must be enhanced to confirm the will of the people, rather than who voted for whom. The latter is an inprecise compromise, that for the sake of time and money, approximates the former in the majority of elections. This election is the exception. Our government has a duty to serve its people and their will, not marks on ballots or numbers on a TV screen.
We should not let our nation's fate be decided by confusion or irregularities just because it is easier. Every vote counts, so let's count every vote.
I'd like to note now that there is every chance that Bush will still win in the final count. Would you rather be absolutely sure to the last vote that this is what the people want (and maybe the people want Bush) or would you rather just give up at the first sign of a victor? Why didn't Bush concede Florida when the networks predicted Gore? Is there supposed to be some arbitrary level at which we should no longer be vigilant in our democracy?
Slashdot Mirror
It's all about the relative offensive nature, so they'll all be in the same context. The idea is that if "my cunt hurts" is more offensive than "my ass hurts," then "you cunt" should be more offensive than "you ass."
--
In other words, just because we grow "better" crops doesn't mean we've won.
And similarly, just because we grow GE crops doesn't mean we've lost.
On many levels GE is just like antibiotics - build a better disease-killer, and all you get are better diseases.
You can't group GE crops together like this. Genetic engineering is a process, not a product. Sure one product might be bad, but the process is sound and exhaustive tests indicate that this product is too. In fact, this golden rice doesn't contain any pesticides or extra protection that normal rice doesn't already. So this product, created with a scientifically sound process, is perfectly fine under your criterion. Tell me now again why we shouldn't be supporting this whole-heartedly?
This is why the social part of the problem is so vital. Slash-and-burn techniques won't stop being used just because the crops being grown are now GE. And if those new GE foods aren't shipped to places that need them, but rather appear in supermarkets in the U.S. (fetching higher prices than the "less healthy" non-GE equivalent, of course), then we haven't achieved anything.
Both of these problems exist independently of GE food. So instead of trying to block GE food just because it isn't a perfect solution, maybe you should try to stop these other practices regardless of what food is being produced or sold.
--
What a coincidence. I'm just starting a remarkably similar survey for my statistics class.
"An investigation into the relative offensive nature of selected cuss words and racial slurs."
:D
--
I do the exact same thing with a free subdomain from Bizland.com.
--
I use Bizland.com mail forwarding. It works the same way as the first poster's idea, but with a free subdomain. If I remember correctly, with Sneakemail you have to log onto their site every time an address gets spammed and delete/change the account. This way, all you have to do is add it to your filters, which seems to be more convenient to me.
--
When submitting a form, I usually give my email as theirs. For example, I've signed up RealPlayer to send as many 'product updates' as possible to support@real.com. I hope they like it. Or, I use the one mailhost garunteed never to point to a real machine, example.com.
Then there's anything@spamcheck.bizland.com, where I can change 'anything' to the name of the site I'm giving it to (see my slashdot email), and later filter all mail coming to that address if it starts getting spammed.
--
"Because up until very recently they haven't been really all that interested in discouraging personal piracy. Personal piracy made them the Standard and has kept them there."
This is why I doubt it will happen. You "up until very recently," but what caused it to change? If they seriously threaten software piracy, I think they'll do some serious damage to their market share.
--
Eh, if they could do it and have be cost effective, why haven't they done it yet?
--
"As for cracking it - it should be possible (just like any other software)"
Buy the subscription version, then use a full version CD-Key. Unless MS wants to actually print different versions of the CD, it would work. See the note above about the academic version of Office 2k.
--
The only domains that might, if anything, need local character support, or those local TLDs of the specific countries.
.tw, international corporations wishing to reach out to Chinese-speaking customers, and Chinsese immigrants.
Except for all of
Despite that, I pretty much agree with you. This was a bad idea from the start. Are CJK characters so much better than a Roman transliteration?
--
I'm not trying to argue with you, but if the firewall can survive a soft-reboot, wouldn't that mean all it needs is power? IE, you can use it as a NIC, but you don't have to; and the card just thinks the system is in a perpetual process of rebooting.
--
As far as I can tell, it doesn't need the PCI backbone at all, just the power.. so screw IRQs, just hook it up to a phony PCI port that has nothing but power.
--
Dude. South Park is one of the most often pirated series on TV. Minutes after it airs you can download it online.
As long as Comedy Central's advertisers don't realize this (and they haven't seem to yet), Comedy Central is ok. I think the case will be the same with Dune; if people really want to pirate it, they will, but it won't hurt Scifi's revenue much.
-z129
--
But if it's been labelled porn when it's really not, then you may not be able to access it because of parental, ISP, or government restrictions.
Parents have a right to restrict access for their children. The US government does not. ISPs should not. With the money coming from porn on the net and the intense competition among ISPs, I doubt they could.
But under the dictionary definition, goatse.cx wouldn't be in ".xxx" since I'm pretty sure it's intended to sicken rather than stimulate sexually.
Indeed. So you have found a loophole. But I fall back onto my argument that just because it isn't perfect doesn't mean we shouldn't use it at all.
--
Because you can't control every moment of your child's life.
.com (or even a free country-specific domain) and they don't want to pay for an extra domain. Maybe they don't consider their content to be "XXX" even though you do.
.com domains would have the opportunity to 'link' their .com domains to their .xxx domains and only pay for one. Anyone wondering whether or not their site is a pornographic should grab a dictionary: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement. In summary, a graphical sex ed. site would be .com, but a non-nude up-skirt site would be .xxx.
This makes no sense. I can't control everything, so I shouldn't try to control what I can?
Why should entire sections of the Internet be censored just because a curious child might see a nipple?
No one has successfully proven to me that simply adding a xxx TLD would result in censorship, and therefore "just because a curious child might see a nipple" is reason enough to do it.
Maybe they already have a
Perhaps for a certain period of time, owners of
--
What are you talking about? This isn't software. It doesn't block anything. And if there are any legitimate sites in the porn TLD -- I've no clue why there would be -- I could make the choice not to block it quite easily. I can supervise my child, but I can also use this TLD to remove the largest risk of porn exposure on the net: commercial porn sites.
--
Why does it matter? If you disagree with their distinctions, you don't have to do anything. You would be able to access porn sites just as easily as you would Slashdot.
That being said, I think the distinction should be drawn with the dictionary definition: material designed or presented with the intent to stimulate sexually. This would mean that a foot fetish site with no real nudity would be pornographic, but a breast cancer site or a sex ed. site with graphical photographs of genitalia or intercourse wouldn't be.
--
Ok, so I guess you don't need a network or enough space on the hard drive for more than a few documents. If you need graphics, I suppose you could wait a minute after every action. God help you if you ever try to figure out any hardware problems with the mishmash of random computers you've got.
In my experience working with schools, however, a donated computer is rarely workable as-is and a lot work is put into just getting it to work at a bare minimum level. Sure, you could expend time and energy getting these old computers to work; and sure, you don't need the fastest things on the block. But in the long run I think you'll find I'm right when I say that these older computers aren't as cheap as you think and they aren't worth your time.
--
My problem with the .porn/.xxx TLD is that it gives the US too much power to enforce it's morals and beliefs onto other peoples. Like we don't already have that power as it is.
Who, exactly, would be forcing these other countries to filter out the porn TLD? This is just labelling that makes it easier for individuals to self-censor. If you (or another nation) don't feel that it's necessary, you don't have to do anything. The Internet will still work the same way it always did. The only people left out would be the people who don't want to see the stuff anyway.
--
The parent should consider talking to his or her child so that the child is able to deal with the bad things to which he or she will eventually be exposed (Internet or not).
.xxx domains would still be available to those who wanted them?
OK, say, as a parent, I've already done this. I still don't want my children exposed to such pornographic material. Why shouldn't I, as the parent and legal guardian of a developing minor, have the right to control what my child is exposed to? Why should your freedom to sell pornography indescriminately impose on my freedom to raise my child the way I choose, especially considering that
--
Look at what has happened to DeCSS?
It has been forced underground which has effectively killed it.
You must know nothing of the Divx scene. Countless titles have been ripped and are out there if you can find them. (And it's only hard to find them because they're big, not because they're illegal.) DVD ripping software is advancing at an incredible pace; already there are DeCSS counterparts that are faster, easier and more compliant than DeCSS ever was. I don't see people in a hurry to mirror VOBDec or put it on t-shirts. DeCSS is, in fact, more popular than it would be without these lawsuits.
Why is that? Because DVD ripping is equated with piracy. DVD ripping software is equated with free speech; and by challenging DeCSS, the MPAA has pissed off a lot of people who wouldn't normally touch the stuff.
--
There are more problems with older computers than just their speed. Hardware upgrades are next to impossible to find. Did you know that SIMMs are more expensive than brand spanking new PC133 DIMMs? Or that a 486DX100 CPU is more expensive than a Duron? Try finding ethernet cards for those 286s. Or larger hard drives. Swaping files between computers that don't support the same floppy format is a pain. Insuring that all the same software runs the same on all computers is next to impossible. I suppose this New Deal thing would try to fix that, but then you can't run any outside Windows or Mac programs.
Really, an old computer is just as expensive as a new one, so you might as well get new ones. And despite what the politicians say about the Internet gap, a computer is a ultimately luxury device. There is no reason to believe that 'developing countries' need computers so much that they should settle for half-assed solutions. Wait a while for the technology to develop; and in the meantime, keep doing what has worked for years.
--
Reminds me of all the anime series just now coming to America that ended years ago in Japan.. It's just as sad..
--
Puh-leez.
There is one very important to reconsider this ballot: it decides the fate of the nation.
The Republicans are calling fowl in Iowa and in other states, stating that every state has irregularities. Their retort is that if we raise such a fuss over Florida, why not other states; why not every state? Hey, if you want to have a recount there and the law allows it, then by all means do it. All that will happen will be a more accurate (2) and more precise (2) measurement of the will of the people who voted. In a race as tight as this, that precision matters a lot.
In '96, the race was nowhere near as tight as it is now. Even with a relatively generous margin of error, the election was accurate (2); it needn't be so precise (2).
In an election where the accuracy is in question, the precision must be enhanced to confirm the will of the people, rather than who voted for whom. The latter is an inprecise compromise, that for the sake of time and money, approximates the former in the majority of elections. This election is the exception. Our government has a duty to serve its people and their will, not marks on ballots or numbers on a TV screen.
We should not let our nation's fate be decided by confusion or irregularities just because it is easier. Every vote counts, so let's count every vote.
I'd like to note now that there is every chance that Bush will still win in the final count. Would you rather be absolutely sure to the last vote that this is what the people want (and maybe the people want Bush) or would you rather just give up at the first sign of a victor? Why didn't Bush concede Florida when the networks predicted Gore? Is there supposed to be some arbitrary level at which we should no longer be vigilant in our democracy?
--
And I suppose you'd be in favor of reading aloud the latest Windows additions to bugtraq at a Microsoft shareholders meeting?
--