Basically this is nearly the ultimate absurd result that we are seeing here and it probably can even get worse. You want to build a road somewhere? Well, you are violating a copyright on other people building horizontal surfaces to allow circular wheels (and legs I suppose) to run on them. You want to build a house? Are you going to have a roof? Foundation? Walls? Windows? Doors? Fucking copyright violator. Absurd, isn't it? Or is it really absurd to expect that ruling like that can actually be passed given the fact that it is a government entity that can pass that ruling and given that governments are already given authority to rule on these issues?
No, the real solution is not even about money exchanging hands (though I wouldn't be surprised in case of Oracle), it is about the power that governments have over our heads, and this power is as insane as it is absurd.
No company or person should be given government protected monopoly on anything, including any invention, copyright, whatever. That's not how evolution works, that's not how cultures worked and still keep working. That type of power is destructive, not constructive in any way. Let the people and companies decide how to provide their services and products in a world that does not automatically protect them from any type of competition. At the very least this cannot be a power granted to government, deal with these issues on contract basis and using trade secrets if you must.
Anyway, I can only leave 1 or 2 comments here now given that 24 hours passed since my account's 'karma' was obliterated again by moderators who want to make sure I cannot reply to comments made to me, so don't expect many comments here either.
You mean in the same way that a manufacturer of a spoon "illegally copied" information about a human mouth?
In the same way that a road construction crew "illegally copied" information about wheels being round?
In the same way that a manufacturer of a catheter "illegally copied" information about urethra?
This is API, API is information about CONNECTING pieces together, it is a contract information, definition of connectivity, not implementation details.
This is not a problem that is just related to Java somehow either, this concerns everything, every language, nearly every field and industry.
1. Who says 'my business' is causing a disturbance? Do you generally know which hotel somebody stays in if they are running around drunk on the street?
2. I don't believe for a moment that there is an actual problem of that type, most people sleep at night and I am almost completely sure this entire fucking article is a gigantic exaggeration like pretty much everything else that pops into the media.
3. Hotels being in so called 'commercial districts' does not change the hotel customers being drunk 1 block away from the hotel, beside which hotels are mostly located near private housing anyway, not in factory or warehouse zones.
4. By my standards there is no question at all, I am completely against all government involvement into any business and money, so no, by my standards this is a cut and dry case of government oppression. You are the one full of shit, hotels are located near other houses and buildings all the time and their clients can get drunk and noisy anywhere at all, be it a city or a beach or transit or whatever.
A bunch of nonsense. Somebody got drunk and noisy, so what? People living in those houses never drink? Never get noisy? People don't leave hotels and don't get noisy and drunk? Are hotels covering tourist behaviour outside of hotel premises? You are full of shit, just like this entire case.
Ha ha,ignorant little ass,apologise for yourself, not for others. As an anarcho capitalist, objectivist I denounce any association with you whatsoever. You don't represent me or my ideals in any way. Now shoo.
First: it is false to assume people don't have insurance just because they did not pay for a government license. Second it is false to assume that a flat owner is unaware of the risks. Third not buying insurance does not in any way imply inability to pay for damages should that be necessary.
It is you, who lives in a black and white world, where absence of a government seal means some kind of a problem and presence of a government seal means some type of a guarantee of quality or whatever.
Individuals must be free to make individual decisions and live with any consequences.
Rethink your assumptions. Anybody not buying insurance is taking a risk but it is a known risk with their own savings, just like anybody choosing airbnb to a hotel. People are taking a risk to minimize their expenses and the establishment fights it via government oppression.
You are an ignorant little ass, you have no clue even about your own government system. The USA Constitution talks about the consent of the governed and there is no consent. Beside that, as QN anarcho capitalist, objectivist I reject any notion of limited government power over an individual in the first place.
The only shithole in existence is your broken mind, so everything else is truly irrelevant in this so called 'conversation'. Ukraine saw its share of anarchists, who were fighting against various establishments and governments and they died in that fight, people see freedom exactly for what it is - 'live free or die' is not just a sentence. Were people fighting wars against governments in search of actual freedom immature? I think not, I think the reality is the opposite, you are what is immature, a termite looking for a colony.
I know perfectly well what freedom is and I come from the land where at least some people understood what freedom was for them even though it was taken away from them by collectivists, just like you. Eventually by hook or crook they off killed enough people there to paralyse the future generations enough so they would go with the garbage collectivist propaganda. Of-course lately some people decided that they want their own version of freedom, which obviously led to another attack by yet more collectivist government forces.
In any case the only people that are truly immature and ignorant are those, who use government violence as a proxy for their own gain and you are included.
Freedom is protection against oppression by the collective, that's what freedom is. As to me being a teenager, ha, I wish. You on the other hand are not a human individual the way I see it, you would be much happier in an insect colony.
You are the fucking moron, there shouldn't be such a concept as a 'public road' in the first place. Government doesn't belong in any property or business or money and should not be allowed to force people to buy into or participate in any programs whatsoever. As I said: you can't understand what an individual is, you are a termite.
I should have added: I have 0 interest in paying for anybody else's service under the gun of a government thug.
A person breaks their arm and can't pay for a hospital service, that's not hospital's or my problem. They SHOULD have money to pay for it, they can ASK FAMILY to help them, they can ASK for CHARITY to pay for it, they can put it on CREDIT.
There are many many things a person should be doing, NONE of those things involves using guns, including proxy guns of a government.
If I break my arm, I will go to the hospital and pay for the service, unlike you obviously, who doesn't understand that concept.
You are wrong of-course in every possible way, you are on the side of taking away people's choices before they are able to exercise them. You are on the side of oppression the moment a human being makes it into this world and until the moment he exits.
You know, it's unfortunate that you exist in the same plane of this Universe with me, we just don't belong on the same planet or in the same species, you are clearly not an individual human being as far as I am concerned. You would be much more at home in a colony of termites or some such.
Whatâ(TM)s important to remember politically about this is if youâ(TM)re a state and you donâ(TM)t set up an exchange, that means your citizens donâ(TM)t get their tax creditsâ"but your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill. So youâ(TM)re essentially saying [to] your citizens youâ(TM)re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country. I hope that thatâ(TM)s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges. But, you know, once again the politics can get ugly around this.
You know, you really have to question your own biases and assumptions before telling people they are lying or whatever.
Actually at the heart of the matter is the entire concept of individual freedom. I know, it's not popular with the mob to talk about individual freedom, in a mob there are no individuals, thus - the mob.
However though my argument always falls on deaf ears I will not stop making it. It is the freedom of the individual that is at stake every time the collective (the mob, the majority and their violent armed proxy force known as the government) decides to impose more rules, the fewer individual freedoms are left untouched by this violence and oppression.
And it is violence and oppression. I would not pay 1 penny in income, wealth and any form of income redistributing taxes if it were not for so called 'legal' and 'legitimate' violence of the state. But the state derives its authority from the governed, so I hear. But the governed supposedly do not themselves have the right to steal from each other, to imprison each other and to murder each other. Yet the government has this authority. So what gives the government this authority? Clearly the governed do not have that power, so how can they give that power if they themselves don't have it? Well they cannot. The entire concept is absurd and as far as I am concerned illegal, illegitimate, immoral.
My point is: the government itself doesn't actually have the authority to delegate who is allowed to do what for living, to instrument licenses, to legislate business and labour, to control and legislate money, any of it. As long as I exist on this planet I see all of it as illegitimate and as such I will never respect any of it, nor will I agree with it and I see it as my primary objective to deny any and all governments any and all authority over me.
As such my position is that it is the most important moral imperative to undermine all government activities and laws in every way.
And the problem with not stealing property from people is???? I get it, we want to steal as a society, apparently society agreed that it consists of unbelievable pieces of total puke laden shit induced gangrenous fish cunts and not people, who are absolutely on board for any kind of theft possible and they want the government with guns to go and do the dirty work on their behalf. Apparently they want to seem 'legit' while doing it. Dirtbags.
- unclear? What was unclear about using taxes to beat individual States into submission? It was exceedingly clear that Congress put language into the law on purpose to force States to set up their own exchanges or be subject to taxes without getting any benefits from them. That was as clear as day.
Some States called the bluff of the Congress on this crap and SCOTUS bailed Congress out. It was never unclear, it was perfectly clear and SCOTUS knowingly broke the law.
The country should not be known as the United States of America at all, there is nothing United about it. It should be known as the IDA - ILLEGAL Dictatorship of America.
and in the case of health insurance, to be free from finance crippling or premature death inducing inefficient health care arrangements
- or as they said in 1984: war is peace. "To be free of payment for a service" is not at all the same thing as to be free from government oppression. "To be free of payment for a service" = provide government with tools of oppression to take from somebody else to pay for my service, to allow government to steal, imprison and murder people so that I can have the service I feel entitled to.
"To be free" does not mean not to have to pay for your own life's needs and choices, it means not to have other people dictate to you how you live, but clearly you don't know that.
Yes. It helps prevent the establishment of a hereditary aristocracy. Feel free to argue for those.
- the only reason to not burn all of your savings by the life end is to pass it to your own children and survivors, not to some unknown to you people, that makes no sense at all. I am going to argue that anybody who owns any property should be able to exercise complete control over that property without having any taxes charged by any government whatsoever and this means they must be able to pass that property to anybody whatsoever of their choosing and it is none of government's or the mob's business. But of-course the mob uses the oppression of the government to do their dirty work for them, to steal from a minority to subsidise themselves. It's is immoral and economically unsound behaviour and it is 'legalized' by the corrupt system that exists.
I feel the need. The need to provide a competing to Google play store site where any and all activities will be allowed.
Google has their right to control their private property, which is what their site is. Other people may have different opinions on their own sites. Of course the phone or tablet has to be unjailed from Google prison.
Ok, if you want to defend your idea of what people should be doing with their own health and money based on some socialist ideology that's one thing, but stop fucking lying, unless you are so misinformed that you don't know that the way this wording in this 'law' was drafted was to ensure that the individual States fall in line by promising to use their money to subsidise other States if they themselves didn't participate in what the Feds wanted.
This fucking illegal piece of shit law passed ONLY due to the language that you now call 'poorly drafted', if that language wasn't there this piece of shit illegal law could not pass.
Slashdot Mirror
My position on copyrights and patents was always the same: abolish all patents and copyrights and prevent government from providing monopolies with these laws.
Basically this is nearly the ultimate absurd result that we are seeing here and it probably can even get worse. You want to build a road somewhere? Well, you are violating a copyright on other people building horizontal surfaces to allow circular wheels (and legs I suppose) to run on them. You want to build a house? Are you going to have a roof? Foundation? Walls? Windows? Doors? Fucking copyright violator. Absurd, isn't it? Or is it really absurd to expect that ruling like that can actually be passed given the fact that it is a government entity that can pass that ruling and given that governments are already given authority to rule on these issues?
No, the real solution is not even about money exchanging hands (though I wouldn't be surprised in case of Oracle), it is about the power that governments have over our heads, and this power is as insane as it is absurd.
No company or person should be given government protected monopoly on anything, including any invention, copyright, whatever. That's not how evolution works, that's not how cultures worked and still keep working. That type of power is destructive, not constructive in any way. Let the people and companies decide how to provide their services and products in a world that does not automatically protect them from any type of competition. At the very least this cannot be a power granted to government, deal with these issues on contract basis and using trade secrets if you must.
Anyway, I can only leave 1 or 2 comments here now given that 24 hours passed since my account's 'karma' was obliterated again by moderators who want to make sure I cannot reply to comments made to me, so don't expect many comments here either.
You mean in the same way that a manufacturer of a spoon "illegally copied" information about a human mouth?
In the same way that a road construction crew "illegally copied" information about wheels being round?
In the same way that a manufacturer of a catheter "illegally copied" information about urethra?
This is API, API is information about CONNECTING pieces together, it is a contract information, definition of connectivity, not implementation details.
This is not a problem that is just related to Java somehow either, this concerns everything, every language, nearly every field and industry.
1. Who says 'my business' is causing a disturbance? Do you generally know which hotel somebody stays in if they are running around drunk on the street?
2. I don't believe for a moment that there is an actual problem of that type, most people sleep at night and I am almost completely sure this entire fucking article is a gigantic exaggeration like pretty much everything else that pops into the media.
3. Hotels being in so called 'commercial districts' does not change the hotel customers being drunk 1 block away from the hotel, beside which hotels are mostly located near private housing anyway, not in factory or warehouse zones.
4. By my standards there is no question at all, I am completely against all government involvement into any business and money, so no, by my standards this is a cut and dry case of government oppression. You are the one full of shit, hotels are located near other houses and buildings all the time and their clients can get drunk and noisy anywhere at all, be it a city or a beach or transit or whatever.
A bunch of nonsense. Somebody got drunk and noisy, so what? People living in those houses never drink? Never get noisy? People don't leave hotels and don't get noisy and drunk? Are hotels covering tourist behaviour outside of hotel premises? You are full of shit, just like this entire case.
Ha ha,ignorant little ass,apologise for yourself, not for others. As an anarcho capitalist, objectivist I denounce any association with you whatsoever. You don't represent me or my ideals in any way. Now shoo.
I don't need Somalia for any so called examples, my own country of birth has a deep history of freedom fighters, anarchists of various kinds who managed for years to stave off much larger forces from East and West. Of course lately another fight started and we will see how this goes. I am an anarcho capitalist, objectivist, and your childish leaning towards limited government is of no interest to me. How I deal with the reality around me is not for most people either.
First: it is false to assume people don't have insurance just because they did not pay for a government license.
Second it is false to assume that a flat owner is unaware of the risks.
Third not buying insurance does not in any way imply inability to pay for damages should that be necessary.
It is you, who lives in a black and white world, where absence of a government seal means some kind of a problem and presence of a government seal means some type of a guarantee of quality or whatever.
Individuals must be free to make individual decisions and live with any consequences.
Rethink your assumptions. Anybody not buying insurance is taking a risk but it is a known risk with their own savings, just like anybody choosing airbnb to a hotel. People are taking a risk to minimize their expenses and the establishment fights it via government oppression.
You don't need to buy insurance to be insured, it is called savings.
Not having insurance means this: the hotel industry lobbies the government to make competition illegal, that is all it is.
You are an ignorant little ass, you have no clue even about your own government system. The USA Constitution talks about the consent of the governed and there is no consent. Beside that, as QN anarcho capitalist, objectivist I reject any notion of limited government power over an individual in the first place.
The only shithole in existence is your broken mind, so everything else is truly irrelevant in this so called 'conversation'. Ukraine saw its share of anarchists, who were fighting against various establishments and governments and they died in that fight, people see freedom exactly for what it is - 'live free or die' is not just a sentence. Were people fighting wars against governments in search of actual freedom immature? I think not, I think the reality is the opposite, you are what is immature, a termite looking for a colony.
I know perfectly well what freedom is and I come from the land where at least some people understood what freedom was for them even though it was taken away from them by collectivists, just like you. Eventually by hook or crook they off killed enough people there to paralyse the future generations enough so they would go with the garbage collectivist propaganda. Of-course lately some people decided that they want their own version of freedom, which obviously led to another attack by yet more collectivist government forces.
In any case the only people that are truly immature and ignorant are those, who use government violence as a proxy for their own gain and you are included.
Freedom is protection against oppression by the collective, that's what freedom is. As to me being a teenager, ha, I wish. You on the other hand are not a human individual the way I see it, you would be much happier in an insect colony.
You are the fucking moron, there shouldn't be such a concept as a 'public road' in the first place. Government doesn't belong in any property or business or money and should not be allowed to force people to buy into or participate in any programs whatsoever. As I said: you can't understand what an individual is, you are a termite.
I should have added: I have 0 interest in paying for anybody else's service under the gun of a government thug.
A person breaks their arm and can't pay for a hospital service, that's not hospital's or my problem. They SHOULD have money to pay for it, they can ASK FAMILY to help them, they can ASK for CHARITY to pay for it, they can put it on CREDIT.
There are many many things a person should be doing, NONE of those things involves using guns, including proxy guns of a government.
If I break my arm, I will go to the hospital and pay for the service, unlike you obviously, who doesn't understand that concept.
You are wrong of-course in every possible way, you are on the side of taking away people's choices before they are able to exercise them. You are on the side of oppression the moment a human being makes it into this world and until the moment he exits.
You know, it's unfortunate that you exist in the same plane of this Universe with me, we just don't belong on the same planet or in the same species, you are clearly not an individual human being as far as I am concerned. You would be much more at home in a colony of termites or some such.
Well, key architect, Jonathan Gruber says otherwise back in 2012.
Whatâ(TM)s important to remember politically about this is if youâ(TM)re a state and you donâ(TM)t set up an exchange, that means your citizens donâ(TM)t get their tax creditsâ"but your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill. So youâ(TM)re essentially saying [to] your citizens youâ(TM)re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country. I hope that thatâ(TM)s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges. But, you know, once again the politics can get ugly around this.
You know, you really have to question your own biases and assumptions before telling people they are lying or whatever.
Actually at the heart of the matter is the entire concept of individual freedom. I know, it's not popular with the mob to talk about individual freedom, in a mob there are no individuals, thus - the mob.
However though my argument always falls on deaf ears I will not stop making it. It is the freedom of the individual that is at stake every time the collective (the mob, the majority and their violent armed proxy force known as the government) decides to impose more rules, the fewer individual freedoms are left untouched by this violence and oppression.
And it is violence and oppression. I would not pay 1 penny in income, wealth and any form of income redistributing taxes if it were not for so called 'legal' and 'legitimate' violence of the state. But the state derives its authority from the governed, so I hear. But the governed supposedly do not themselves have the right to steal from each other, to imprison each other and to murder each other. Yet the government has this authority. So what gives the government this authority? Clearly the governed do not have that power, so how can they give that power if they themselves don't have it? Well they cannot. The entire concept is absurd and as far as I am concerned illegal, illegitimate, immoral.
My point is: the government itself doesn't actually have the authority to delegate who is allowed to do what for living, to instrument licenses, to legislate business and labour, to control and legislate money, any of it. As long as I exist on this planet I see all of it as illegitimate and as such I will never respect any of it, nor will I agree with it and I see it as my primary objective to deny any and all governments any and all authority over me.
As such my position is that it is the most important moral imperative to undermine all government activities and laws in every way.
And the problem with not stealing property from people is???? I get it, we want to steal as a society, apparently society agreed that it consists of unbelievable pieces of total puke laden shit induced gangrenous fish cunts and not people, who are absolutely on board for any kind of theft possible and they want the government with guns to go and do the dirty work on their behalf. Apparently they want to seem 'legit' while doing it. Dirtbags.
if a law has an unclear section
- unclear? What was unclear about using taxes to beat individual States into submission? It was exceedingly clear that Congress put language into the law on purpose to force States to set up their own exchanges or be subject to taxes without getting any benefits from them. That was as clear as day.
Some States called the bluff of the Congress on this crap and SCOTUS bailed Congress out. It was never unclear, it was perfectly clear and SCOTUS knowingly broke the law.
The country should not be known as the United States of America at all, there is nothing United about it. It should be known as the IDA - ILLEGAL Dictatorship of America.
and in the case of health insurance, to be free from finance crippling or premature death inducing inefficient health care arrangements
- or as they said in 1984: war is peace. "To be free of payment for a service" is not at all the same thing as to be free from government oppression. "To be free of payment for a service" = provide government with tools of oppression to take from somebody else to pay for my service, to allow government to steal, imprison and murder people so that I can have the service I feel entitled to.
"To be free" does not mean not to have to pay for your own life's needs and choices, it means not to have other people dictate to you how you live, but clearly you don't know that.
Yes. It helps prevent the establishment of a hereditary aristocracy. Feel free to argue for those.
- the only reason to not burn all of your savings by the life end is to pass it to your own children and survivors, not to some unknown to you people, that makes no sense at all. I am going to argue that anybody who owns any property should be able to exercise complete control over that property without having any taxes charged by any government whatsoever and this means they must be able to pass that property to anybody whatsoever of their choosing and it is none of government's or the mob's business. But of-course the mob uses the oppression of the government to do their dirty work for them, to steal from a minority to subsidise themselves. It's is immoral and economically unsound behaviour and it is 'legalized' by the corrupt system that exists.
I feel the need. The need to provide a competing to Google play store site where any and all activities will be allowed.
Google has their right to control their private property, which is what their site is. Other people may have different opinions on their own sites. Of course the phone or tablet has to be unjailed from Google prison.
Ok, if you want to defend your idea of what people should be doing with their own health and money based on some socialist ideology that's one thing, but stop fucking lying, unless you are so misinformed that you don't know that the way this wording in this 'law' was drafted was to ensure that the individual States fall in line by promising to use their money to subsidise other States if they themselves didn't participate in what the Feds wanted.
This fucking illegal piece of shit law passed ONLY due to the language that you now call 'poorly drafted', if that language wasn't there this piece of shit illegal law could not pass.