Another early attempt to shut down the site involved a United States District Court judge in California. In 2008, Judge Jeffrey S. White ordered the American version of the site shut down after it published confidential documents concerning a subsidiary of a Swiss bank. Two weeks later he reversed himself, in part recognizing that the order had little effect because the same material could be accessed on a number of other "mirror sites."
Judge White said at the time, "We live in an age when people can do some good things and people can do some terrible things without accountability necessarily in a court of law."
yes, Judge, you are obviously doing one of those terrible things without accountability in a court of law when you silence the truth.
Your C and C++ are very widely used, they can be ran anywhere where Assembler exists that can be compiled into binary that runs on an instruction set and memory provided by the hardware manufacturer. Of-course those computers themselves are very widely used, they can be found anywhere where the laws of physics can be understood, chemistry figured out and mathematics computed. So yeah, it's Turtles all the way down.
Alas the product wave summarized the continuity of the repercussion and thus systematically diffused the colloquialism.
The girth of the azimuth has perpetuated limitless capacity to burden the overcoming. Ceramic boulder caved into the singularity, which in itself lambasted in lie of the experimental sentiment profusely.
I can even build my own weapons that are not based on any other weapon. I am not for a government that is afraid of its citizens and thus criminalizes possession of weapons.
HOWEVER, this is not about GOVERNMENT regulation against modification of weapons, this is about a corporation trying to prevent people from changing the thing they bought and they own in ways that they like by creating simulated barriers, like DRM.
Of-course corporations bought the government, thus government creates such atrocities as DMCA to protect the corporations. When the government decides that its role is protecting corporations and attacking its citizens has no moral value any longer.
Who are you replying to? My argument was that Bush started a war in Iraq and it was not a war that should have been started. It was started with false pretenses, US is an occupier in this case, occupier of territory, murderer of civilians and for not a single good reason.
People trying to save a hurt, shot person, they were heroes, sure they were unlucky.
That helo is a flying tank compared to a human body.
There were no RPGs flying around.
Nobody was engaging the helo, it flew around the building assuming that there were weapons, they came out on the other side, none of the people in that group were even alarmed. If they were combatants fighting a helo, they would have been alarmed. They would have been aware there was a helo aiming at them, they weren't, because they were not fighting anyone.
The gunner in that helo is an animal, everyone else involved is a criminal.
When I say ammo I obviously am not talking about the bullets, thank you for taking it literally. I am talking about every possible expense that is converted into pure profit of the war contractors.
Also since when for example Halliburton making money off of this war is a conspiracy?
You are not in Iraq to prove to anyone that you are good guys, you are in Iraq to make money for the corporate war contractors, to have your army kill some people so they can exercise while spending the ammo and thus requiring more to be manufactured, you are there for political reasons of your own government but this has nothing to do with Iraq in itself, it's just a war that US wants for various reasons.
Tell me, oh wise gigsvt, do you imagine that a single guy out of a group would target a helicopter with a weapon and then the entire group would be wondering around like a herd of goats when the helicopter makes a circle around the building and they wouldn't even attempt at scattering until there are shots fired from the helicopter?
Do you know what I saw in this video? A small gathering of people for no reason that I am aware of, but none of these people were engaging a helicopter in a fight. None of these people THOUGHT they were engaging anyone in any fight.
If one or more of them would have been engaging a flying tank in a fight, wouldn't it just make sense for them to hide and not walk around like nothing had happened by the time the helicopter makes it around the building and comes out on the other side?
Nobody was engaging these American murderers, animals, in a fight.
Iraq was engaging USA into a fight. Iraq did not attack USA, USA attacked and occupied Iraq. USA is the clear aggressor and its soldiers are clearly murderers.
This. This is the part that is always missing from certain sections of anti-war protestors and war-supporters alike.
- this war was never supposed to start. It is a personal vendetta and it is a way to make money. This was not a war of ideologies, this was not a war of necessity, this was another 'short and victorious war' that always end up being long and losing for everyone except for the people making money off of it.
Most of us would do the same things in the same situations.
- really? What kind of an animal are you?
'they should not have taken kids into a battle' - those were kids of a guy in the van, he was trying to pick up and help a wounded person. He was a hero and he was killed by an animal in a flying tank.
This is what war is like. It's not at all pretty, or clean. And when your tools are high-powered weapons, the consequences of mistakes are high and that sucks for all involved.
- for ALL involved? For ALL involved? Can you explain that please, how was having these powerful weapons so bad for the helicopter crew?
Also can you tell us what business does the US have shooting people in Iraq?
What business does US have shooting people, any people in Iraq?
Let me put it this way: this was is already bad, I don't need extra videos like this to know that the US is in the wrong, it is the aggressor that is in Iraq to kill and to make money on war contracts. Killing US citizens is justified in the minds of many by this video whether they are civilians or not.
Nobody in corporate world goes to prison for any violation, they get bailouts.
People who go to prison from the corporate world are not going there for actual violations of the law but for different reasons. For example Bernard Madoff is in prison not because of anything that the government could do to him but because if he stayed out of prison he would have been dead by now.
Correction. My FF extensions (4 that are public on mozdev and mozilla) were downloaded 500,000 times. They are actively used by about a third of those people.
These same extensions are also downloaded from various other unofficial sites and I do not have statistics on that.
What is the problem with making the platform open in the first place? Possibly because that will end up creating a product that is harder to use and not deliver a satisfactory end user experience.
- that is not an argument.
If a device exists and software exists and it is sold as is, the only step that is needed to provide this device as a completely open platform is the release of the hardware spec and the source of the software.
However, if there is some objection to releasing the software source code, at the very minimum it should not be made more difficult than necessary to create additional software for the device by crippling it with a DRM system.
Are you saying that it is easier to put in a DRM system than not to put one in? That is just insane logic.
You are trying to be cute there, but it used to be that every piece of hardware we bought came with schematics. People could fix their own TVs, cars, dishwashers. People could modify them easier because the schematics were provided.
Over the times it changed, especially with computer hardware, that companies decided to stop this practice, however it does not mean that they were correct in doing so, they are just trying to maintain a monopoly by hiding the stuff they are selling to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Another early attempt to shut down the site involved a United States District Court judge in California. In 2008, Judge Jeffrey S. White ordered the American version of the site shut down after it published confidential documents concerning a subsidiary of a Swiss bank. Two weeks later he reversed himself, in part recognizing that the order had little effect because the same material could be accessed on a number of other "mirror sites."
Judge White said at the time, "We live in an age when people can do some good things and people can do some terrible things without accountability necessarily in a court of law."
yes, Judge, you are obviously doing one of those terrible things without accountability in a court of law when you silence the truth.
well, when it's in private collection it is still possible to negotiate with the owner to look at it when necessary, probably for a fee.
Your C and C++ are very widely used, they can be ran anywhere where Assembler exists that can be compiled into binary that runs on an instruction set and memory provided by the hardware manufacturer. Of-course those computers themselves are very widely used, they can be found anywhere where the laws of physics can be understood, chemistry figured out and mathematics computed. So yeah, it's Turtles all the way down.
prosthetic hand?
I am not sure that anything, short of your penis falling off, is a reason not to masturbate.
- also I wonder if there is any reason in the world not to use this as a sig?
I am not sure that anything, short of your penis falling off, is a reason not to masturbate.
Bermuda.
Alas the product wave summarized the continuity of the repercussion and thus systematically diffused the colloquialism.
The girth of the azimuth has perpetuated limitless capacity to burden the overcoming. Ceramic boulder caved into the singularity, which in itself lambasted in lie of the experimental sentiment profusely.
Capricorn?
I can even build my own weapons that are not based on any other weapon. I am not for a government that is afraid of its citizens and thus criminalizes possession of weapons.
HOWEVER, this is not about GOVERNMENT regulation against modification of weapons, this is about a corporation trying to prevent people from changing the thing they bought and they own in ways that they like by creating simulated barriers, like DRM.
Of-course corporations bought the government, thus government creates such atrocities as DMCA to protect the corporations. When the government decides that its role is protecting corporations and attacking its citizens has no moral value any longer.
that's not my argument, my argument is that this illegal, unjustified, started on false pretenses, has no point except to enrich the war contractors.
Who are you replying to? My argument was that Bush started a war in Iraq and it was not a war that should have been started. It was started with false pretenses, US is an occupier in this case, occupier of territory, murderer of civilians and for not a single good reason.
Hindsight?
People trying to save a hurt, shot person, they were heroes, sure they were unlucky.
That helo is a flying tank compared to a human body.
There were no RPGs flying around.
Nobody was engaging the helo, it flew around the building assuming that there were weapons, they came out on the other side, none of the people in that group were even alarmed. If they were combatants fighting a helo, they would have been alarmed. They would have been aware there was a helo aiming at them, they weren't, because they were not fighting anyone.
The gunner in that helo is an animal, everyone else involved is a criminal.
When I say ammo I obviously am not talking about the bullets, thank you for taking it literally. I am talking about every possible expense that is converted into pure profit of the war contractors.
Also since when for example Halliburton making money off of this war is a conspiracy?
You are not in Iraq to prove to anyone that you are good guys, you are in Iraq to make money for the corporate war contractors, to have your army kill some people so they can exercise while spending the ammo and thus requiring more to be manufactured, you are there for political reasons of your own government but this has nothing to do with Iraq in itself, it's just a war that US wants for various reasons.
Tell me, oh wise gigsvt, do you imagine that a single guy out of a group would target a helicopter with a weapon and then the entire group would be wondering around like a herd of goats when the helicopter makes a circle around the building and they wouldn't even attempt at scattering until there are shots fired from the helicopter?
Do you know what I saw in this video? A small gathering of people for no reason that I am aware of, but none of these people were engaging a helicopter in a fight. None of these people THOUGHT they were engaging anyone in any fight.
If one or more of them would have been engaging a flying tank in a fight, wouldn't it just make sense for them to hide and not walk around like nothing had happened by the time the helicopter makes it around the building and comes out on the other side?
Nobody was engaging these American murderers, animals, in a fight.
Iraq was engaging USA into a fight. Iraq did not attack USA, USA attacked and occupied Iraq. USA is the clear aggressor and its soldiers are clearly murderers.
FUCK. Iraq had NOTHING to do with your 9/11. Nothing.
Or is it that you are looking at someone who may be an 'Arab' and you immediately think that all Arabs are in on it flying airplanes into your towers?
Unbelievable.
This. This is the part that is always missing from certain sections of anti-war protestors and war-supporters alike.
- this war was never supposed to start. It is a personal vendetta and it is a way to make money. This was not a war of ideologies, this was not a war of necessity, this was another 'short and victorious war' that always end up being long and losing for everyone except for the people making money off of it.
This war is a crime in itself.
. In fact, the ultimate responsibility lies with the Bush government that started the war
- I think you should have ended the sentence right there.
Most of us would do the same things in the same situations.
- really? What kind of an animal are you?
'they should not have taken kids into a battle' - those were kids of a guy in the van, he was trying to pick up and help a wounded person. He was a hero and he was killed by an animal in a flying tank.
This is what war is like. It's not at all pretty, or clean. And when your tools are high-powered weapons, the consequences of mistakes are high and that sucks for all involved.
- for ALL involved? For ALL involved? Can you explain that please, how was having these powerful weapons so bad for the helicopter crew?
Also can you tell us what business does the US have shooting people in Iraq?
What business does US have shooting people, any people in Iraq?
Let me put it this way: this was is already bad, I don't need extra videos like this to know that the US is in the wrong, it is the aggressor that is in Iraq to kill and to make money on war contracts. Killing US citizens is justified in the minds of many by this video whether they are civilians or not.
Nobody in corporate world goes to prison for any violation, they get bailouts.
People who go to prison from the corporate world are not going there for actual violations of the law but for different reasons. For example Bernard Madoff is in prison not because of anything that the government could do to him but because if he stayed out of prison he would have been dead by now.
what are these 'women' you are talking about?
Correction. My FF extensions (4 that are public on mozdev and mozilla) were downloaded 500,000 times. They are actively used by about a third of those people.
These same extensions are also downloaded from various other unofficial sites and I do not have statistics on that.
What is the problem with making the platform open in the first place? Possibly because that will end up creating a product that is harder to use and not deliver a satisfactory end user experience.
- that is not an argument.
If a device exists and software exists and it is sold as is, the only step that is needed to provide this device as a completely open platform is the release of the hardware spec and the source of the software.
However, if there is some objection to releasing the software source code, at the very minimum it should not be made more difficult than necessary to create additional software for the device by crippling it with a DRM system.
Are you saying that it is easier to put in a DRM system than not to put one in? That is just insane logic.
You are trying to be cute there, but it used to be that every piece of hardware we bought came with schematics. People could fix their own TVs, cars, dishwashers. People could modify them easier because the schematics were provided.
Over the times it changed, especially with computer hardware, that companies decided to stop this practice, however it does not mean that they were correct in doing so, they are just trying to maintain a monopoly by hiding the stuff they are selling to you.