The action of the courts is not to be a referee to allow/disallow action; their purpose is to reiterate and investigate past actions that are in potential violation of the law. Ultimately, without corruption of course, the constitution will prevail. The words are explicit and the term 'unreasonable' is not a debating point, but rather a requirement for evidence. It places, in common language, the obstacle for violating these rights.
In the case of the wiretapping, any person whose rights were violated without prior conclusive evidence, will stand as an example of the crime. While the courts may later debate about the legitimacy of suggested evidence/reason, the constitution and the protections in the bill of rights still stand. The debate is only after-the-fact.
Bush was only the figurehead and impeaching him will be temporary feel-good bullshit for the proles to digest.
That 4-hour rant would be much more interesting if it described the seedy underbelly of the regime as a whole, to include Cheney, Rove, big Oil's insane profits, the conflict-of-interest contracts involving retired-military execs now working for the military industrial complex, the 9/11 snafu, the FBI/NSA/CIA/etc's blatantly illegal honeymoons with the major telecoms, and finally, a special thanks to Diebold for making it happen. AND AN EXPLANATION FOR BUILDING EFFIN 7!
...simply searching too hard for something to write about. Both the article and the times' response are just blather that will pass like a fart in the wind.
The all caps don't make your point suddenly more valid.
The right to privacy is implied, but not very clearly defined in the Constitution. I'm not saying you shouldn't have a right to privacy. I'm saying there is some legal grey area that should be cleared up.
I think it is reprehensible, but it is up to the courts to decide if it is illegal.
If you're so utterly convinced the Constitution clearly defines your right to privacy, please explain it to me with actual passages. 1) Caps makes it apparent how alarming it is that someone would suggest it is debatable.
2)Evidence: AMENDMENT 4: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
It says it right there, have you ever read our studied the US Constitution? If you're a citizen, I sure hope so; it is the only way to protect yourself from the over-reaching hands of empowered government.
IT IS NOT DEBATABLE. We have a constitution, something all persons of public service swear to uphold and protect. Subverting the explicit protections of privacy in the constitution is not a debatable concept; recognition of the existence and importance of our constitution is the only place where debate can exist, though it would be ridiculous to do so.
Dennis Kucinich is such a joke and a waste of time with is posturing. Bush isn't going to get impeached any more than Clinton was ever impeached - and for precisely the same reason. The president's own political party in each case will block it in the Senate, provided it ever gets there to start with. Kucinich is a fool, and has just demonstrated it to the world! It is not foolish to speak truth. It is foolish to let fear overcome your power as a citizen of a democratic country.
And then your signature tells us the irony in your ad hominem for kucinich.
Cool, then can you please make it so spam is an OPT-IN thing instead of OPT-OUT?
As it stands, the majority of people who receive the 'opt-out' spam DO NOT WANT IT, which makes the solution obvious: Change the system to Opt-In. That way, those of us who want something from someone, get it, and those whose spam is unsolicited can be prosecuted.
It is ridiculous that something so problematic to day-to-day functions is treated as OPT-OUT. If you're a policy maker, how do you justify that aspect of the policy?
How do you drive customer upgrades to more bloaded OSes when customers are demanding devices with lower cpu/ram specs?
Microsoft figured that out 15 years ago... You sell OEMs and customers a nice lean mean OS, and then provide critical security updates which steadily increase the CPU and memory load. That way, your system is seriously dragging, and the next version of the OS, with no such updates, seems reasonably quick compared to your bogged-down old OS. I can testify to your statement. I have an older laptop with 256mb ram and a 6gb hard drive. I Installed windows XP Pro with an intial 1.2 (or so) gigabytes being used by the HDD.
Then I did updates and brought it up through Service Pack 2... Guess what, my OS now takes over 4 gigs of space on my HDD and I cannot find a single file I can delete (like.cab files that you don't need anymore).
It bogged down my system so much that I've installed UBUNTU! HAH!
How old are you, kid? When you say there are those who want to *use their computer*, are you referring to those of us who want to use full desktop applications, like word processors, Matlab, Powerpoint, Photoshop, g++, video games, and Maya? Will be able to *use our computers* on these netbooks?
Or do you think the only thing we can do is surf the web looking for lulz? Grow up. I used to throw that same argument around, until I installed ubuntu on my wife's laptop, tried it on my PC, and discovered WINE!
I kept wondering when a good number of the quality games in windows, like COD4, TF2, etc, would ever make it to linux, but they are already there! There are loads videos on youtube of people playing games, usually with the same, but sometimes even better performance than on their XP/Vista install!
I fell in love with ubuntu once I gave it a shot. I can't move my current PC over because I produce music and some of my hardware is so rare that I wouldn't care to deal with trying to make it work; But my next computer will definitely run an ubuntu/linux install primarily, if not solely. I will keep a spare hard-drive waiting for XP Pro just in case a few games I treasure do not run in Wine (though it seems that most do).
Let them do it. 6.5 Million users, at even 20 GBP a month, would equate to 130 million GBP of income lost. I hope it goes that far so that maybe they will realize that the 130 million/month they lose will seem more important.
What you are describing is personal responsibility.
Not a lot of that here in the US.
Corporations subvert responsibility. Government agencies deny or simply point fingers. States find their own bully-pulpit to blame. Citizens hate more than love each other. Families fall apart. Individuals blame anything but themselves.
It IS too far open for interpretation. I don't see how this law will hold up in court when the constitution is brought into play.
We don't even have legislation for IN-PERSON-BULLYING, so I don't see how this can float.
I just hope it doesn't turn into another M.A.D.D.-esque witchhunt in congress to economically force all states to agree with this b.s. (No, I'm not saying drunk driving is not a problem, but the methods that were taken to get the 21+ drinking age, etc, were wrong.) ---
Reality check, people. Sometimes aspects of life can go bad. Sometimes people aren't your friend. Sometimes you have to rely on what you know and your pure instinct to survive. All people will die, and some will die tragic deaths or succumb to emotional weakness. THIS IS NOTHING NEW. Quit expecting your government to cushion every aspect of life. If you can't stand up for yourself or your kids don't have the self-respect they need, do something about it; make changes at home or on a personal level. You have to make it happen for yourself, there ain't no one else.
I just began installing ubuntu on my laptop with plans to install it on my next PC. I use my current PC for all things, but will keep it for music production. I can't wait to use ubuntu on a new powerful pc! I've seen some things about ubuntu beryl that look phenomenal and make vista's visual interface look like childsplay.
It seems that promising too much in order to hook new users and then hitting the heaviest users (instead of fulfilling the promise)is a very valid business strategy lately. Call the BBB.
1) XBMC does not play anything. 2) if VLC isn't playing something your not doing it right or try mplayer. 3) using that much caps for a completely pointless post makes you a retard. 4) being an 1337 XBOX gaming 14 y/o should take up enough of your time, if not spend more time using your 1337 halo skillz. 5) come back to slashdot when your balls drop. 6) if you choose to ignore 5 remember to remove your finger from the shift key sometimes. 1) maybe YOUR xbmc is broken, mine plays loads of videos. 2) There are videos that do not play well in VLC but play perfect on xbmc. 3) Caps are for capital letters, your point? 4) I'm a 26 year old veteran, now a pre-med student who does a lot of gaming. Sorry to mislead you, but I have a way of having fun in life; we don't always need to be pretentious. 5) My balls dropped long long ago. 6) I remove my fingers from the shift key when I feel it is necessary.
Now, with all due respect, shut the fuck up. You don't know anything about me, but you've surely got enough assumptions to make a fool of yourself. See, I made a fool of myself (in your eyes) for fun because it is a playful way that some people talk on the internet; yet you made a fool of yourself by acting like a pretentious prick. The difference is that I know when I am acting common, while you sit on a high horse sounding like an idiot.
But it should at least be able to play movies via VLC, right?
I just can't seem to lose my XBOX because XBMC is so damn useful. The PS3 native video player still won't support all the videos I use. If they ported XBMC to PS3 I'd cream my pants! XBMC FTMFW x 1 million.... plus 3. XBMC PLAYS ANYTHING!!!! There are videos that even VLC won't play correctly.. Load em up on my xbox classic, open XBMC,.. FLAWLESS.
I have a serious question about DRM. I produce music and often save the songs as MP3s. I distribute my own music as freely as I like as I hold the copyrights and, unlike metallica, I prefer my music to be heard for more than just money; I want people to hear it, not pay me to hear it.
Question: If my songs are not somehow tagged by MS DRM (I know I'm not doing it and they haven't told me they are), can they be stored and played on others' computers that are running Vista? How does MS distinguish the validity of untagged/unmarked music/audio files in Vista?
I hope the answer is yes... Someone who knows about this topic please reply (or PM me if thats possible, I'm a slashdot newbie).
How difficult would it be to coordinate a spoofing system like this that is gradually directed at every used IP across the internet? If it's shown that the *entire* internet is somehow participating in acts of copyright infringement from every IP address across the board, maybe someone might actually begin questioning the current system used to identify those illegally download copyrighted material.
Think of it... the most respected and powerful people in every community simultaneously getting bogus cease and desist letters. (Lawyers, judges, politicians, etc...) I'd be inclined to think *something* just might happen after that. Social Engineering is afoot.
On the topic: I wonder if the RIAA/MPAA will see any reprimand or recourse for their loose litigious activity. Isn't there a crime for false accusation?
Slashdot Mirror
The action of the courts is not to be a referee to allow/disallow action; their purpose is to reiterate and investigate past actions that are in potential violation of the law. Ultimately, without corruption of course, the constitution will prevail. The words are explicit and the term 'unreasonable' is not a debating point, but rather a requirement for evidence. It places, in common language, the obstacle for violating these rights.
In the case of the wiretapping, any person whose rights were violated without prior conclusive evidence, will stand as an example of the crime. While the courts may later debate about the legitimacy of suggested evidence/reason, the constitution and the protections in the bill of rights still stand. The debate is only after-the-fact.
That 4-hour rant would be much more interesting if it described the seedy underbelly of the regime as a whole, to include Cheney, Rove, big Oil's insane profits, the conflict-of-interest contracts involving retired-military execs now working for the military industrial complex, the 9/11 snafu, the FBI/NSA/CIA/etc's blatantly illegal honeymoons with the major telecoms, and finally, a special thanks to Diebold for making it happen. AND AN EXPLANATION FOR BUILDING EFFIN 7!
...simply searching too hard for something to write about. Both the article and the times' response are just blather that will pass like a fart in the wind.
The right to privacy is implied, but not very clearly defined in the Constitution. I'm not saying you shouldn't have a right to privacy. I'm saying there is some legal grey area that should be cleared up.
I think it is reprehensible, but it is up to the courts to decide if it is illegal.
If you're so utterly convinced the Constitution clearly defines your right to privacy, please explain it to me with actual passages. 1) Caps makes it apparent how alarming it is that someone would suggest it is debatable.
2)Evidence: AMENDMENT 4: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
It says it right there, have you ever read our studied the US Constitution? If you're a citizen, I sure hope so; it is the only way to protect yourself from the over-reaching hands of empowered government.
IT IS NOT DEBATABLE. We have a constitution, something all persons of public service swear to uphold and protect. Subverting the explicit protections of privacy in the constitution is not a debatable concept; recognition of the existence and importance of our constitution is the only place where debate can exist, though it would be ridiculous to do so.
We can't rely on our own media to speak or investigate truth; its sad that we have to get it from across the ocean.
This serves to illustrate how closely tied politics, business, and media are in the U.S.
And then your signature tells us the irony in your ad hominem for kucinich.
Cool, then can you please make it so spam is an OPT-IN thing instead of OPT-OUT?
As it stands, the majority of people who receive the 'opt-out' spam DO NOT WANT IT, which makes the solution obvious: Change the system to Opt-In. That way, those of us who want something from someone, get it, and those whose spam is unsolicited can be prosecuted.
It is ridiculous that something so problematic to day-to-day functions is treated as OPT-OUT. If you're a policy maker, how do you justify that aspect of the policy?
Links please.
lmfao.
bye religion, hello GTA4!
Microsoft figured that out 15 years ago... You sell OEMs and customers a nice lean mean OS, and then provide critical security updates which steadily increase the CPU and memory load. That way, your system is seriously dragging, and the next version of the OS, with no such updates, seems reasonably quick compared to your bogged-down old OS. I can testify to your statement. I have an older laptop with 256mb ram and a 6gb hard drive. I Installed windows XP Pro with an intial 1.2 (or so) gigabytes being used by the HDD.
Then I did updates and brought it up through Service Pack 2... Guess what, my OS now takes over 4 gigs of space on my HDD and I cannot find a single file I can delete (like
It bogged down my system so much that I've installed UBUNTU! HAH!
Or do you think the only thing we can do is surf the web looking for lulz? Grow up. I used to throw that same argument around, until I installed ubuntu on my wife's laptop, tried it on my PC, and discovered WINE!
I kept wondering when a good number of the quality games in windows, like COD4, TF2, etc, would ever make it to linux, but they are already there! There are loads videos on youtube of people playing games, usually with the same, but sometimes even better performance than on their XP/Vista install!
I fell in love with ubuntu once I gave it a shot. I can't move my current PC over because I produce music and some of my hardware is so rare that I wouldn't care to deal with trying to make it work; But my next computer will definitely run an ubuntu/linux install primarily, if not solely. I will keep a spare hard-drive waiting for XP Pro just in case a few games I treasure do not run in Wine (though it seems that most do).
Let them do it. 6.5 Million users, at even 20 GBP a month, would equate to 130 million GBP of income lost. I hope it goes that far so that maybe they will realize that the 130 million/month they lose will seem more important.
I wonder what will come of the Olympics when we have our inevitable unified world government.
What you are describing is personal responsibility.
Not a lot of that here in the US.
Corporations subvert responsibility.
Government agencies deny or simply point fingers.
States find their own bully-pulpit to blame.
Citizens hate more than love each other.
Families fall apart.
Individuals blame anything but themselves.
I hate to say it, but its time for some Ron Paul.
It IS too far open for interpretation. I don't see how this law will hold up in court when the constitution is brought into play.
We don't even have legislation for IN-PERSON-BULLYING, so I don't see how this can float.
I just hope it doesn't turn into another M.A.D.D.-esque witchhunt in congress to economically force all states to agree with this b.s. (No, I'm not saying drunk driving is not a problem, but the methods that were taken to get the 21+ drinking age, etc, were wrong.)
---
Reality check, people. Sometimes aspects of life can go bad. Sometimes people aren't your friend. Sometimes you have to rely on what you know and your pure instinct to survive. All people will die, and some will die tragic deaths or succumb to emotional weakness. THIS IS NOTHING NEW. Quit expecting your government to cushion every aspect of life. If you can't stand up for yourself or your kids don't have the self-respect they need, do something about it; make changes at home or on a personal level. You have to make it happen for yourself, there ain't no one else.
Europeans are already fit! Wii need it here so we can earn our dubba-chee!
I just began installing ubuntu on my laptop with plans to install it on my next PC. I use my current PC for all things, but will keep it for music production. I can't wait to use ubuntu on a new powerful pc! I've seen some things about ubuntu beryl that look phenomenal and make vista's visual interface look like childsplay.
I look forward to the day microsoft is #2.
2) if VLC isn't playing something your not doing it right or try mplayer.
3) using that much caps for a completely pointless post makes you a retard.
4) being an 1337 XBOX gaming 14 y/o should take up enough of your time, if not spend more time using your 1337 halo skillz.
5) come back to slashdot when your balls drop.
6) if you choose to ignore 5 remember to remove your finger from the shift key sometimes. 1) maybe YOUR xbmc is broken, mine plays loads of videos.
2) There are videos that do not play well in VLC but play perfect on xbmc.
3) Caps are for capital letters, your point?
4) I'm a 26 year old veteran, now a pre-med student who does a lot of gaming. Sorry to mislead you, but I have a way of having fun in life; we don't always need to be pretentious.
5) My balls dropped long long ago.
6) I remove my fingers from the shift key when I feel it is necessary.
Now, with all due respect, shut the fuck up. You don't know anything about me, but you've surely got enough assumptions to make a fool of yourself. See, I made a fool of myself (in your eyes) for fun because it is a playful way that some people talk on the internet; yet you made a fool of yourself by acting like a pretentious prick. The difference is that I know when I am acting common, while you sit on a high horse sounding like an idiot.
Halo sucks. mouse+kb ftmfw.
Did my refrain from caps please you, sir?
I just can't seem to lose my XBOX because XBMC is so damn useful. The PS3 native video player still won't support all the videos I use. If they ported XBMC to PS3 I'd cream my pants! XBMC FTMFW x 1 million.... plus 3. XBMC PLAYS ANYTHING!!!! There are videos that even VLC won't play correctly.. Load em up on my xbox classic, open XBMC,
QFT QFT QFT
I have a serious question about DRM. I produce music and often save the songs as MP3s. I distribute my own music as freely as I like as I hold the copyrights and, unlike metallica, I prefer my music to be heard for more than just money; I want people to hear it, not pay me to hear it.
Question: If my songs are not somehow tagged by MS DRM (I know I'm not doing it and they haven't told me they are), can they be stored and played on others' computers that are running Vista? How does MS distinguish the validity of untagged/unmarked music/audio files in Vista?
I hope the answer is yes... Someone who knows about this topic please reply (or PM me if thats possible, I'm a slashdot newbie).
Think of it... the most respected and powerful people in every community simultaneously getting bogus cease and desist letters. (Lawyers, judges, politicians, etc...) I'd be inclined to think *something* just might happen after that. Social Engineering is afoot.
On the topic:
I wonder if the RIAA/MPAA will see any reprimand or recourse for their loose litigious activity. Isn't there a crime for false accusation?