It's easy for Google to call software patents junk when their primary source of income is advertising. They can afford to give all their software away (or provide access to it online, whatever) for free. Microsoft, on the other hand, relies on its software to make money.
You have conflated Software Patents and Copyright.
Technically true, but unimportant. I'm talking about facts.
Your opinion does not constitute objective truth.
Also technically correct, but unimportant. I am talking about objective truth.
Do you not understand NY v Ferber, or are you being deliberately disingenuous?
Oh, I understand the case. It's nonsensical to suggest that the ACLU filed an amicus curae brief in this case that had nothing to do with the case. The ACLU was arguing that videos of teenaged boys masturbating were not obscene and therefore were covered by the first amendment.
Again, your opinion.
No, objective fact. How many counts of murder was Scott Peterson convicted of? One of those two was an unborn child. The law recognizes that the unborn child is a person under the law.
Safe, legal, and rare is the common meme. Nobody wants that number to actually go up, it's always preferable for them to go down.
And for this, I ask why? Because you know that it's wrong. Because you know that it's the killing of a defenseless human being.
So you support lawlessness and murder.
Defense of others is an affirmative defense to charges of murder.
Don't come back with "abortion is murder", that's a point that is opinion, not fact.
Yeah, it's impossible to not know what your "side" is saying. Have you considered that part of the reason you can't convince people who don't agree with you is the shrill tone you take?
The people who disagree are immune to persuasion with facts and information.
But again, there's almost universal consensus that wife-beating and child-raping is wrong. Come back when you have the same level of consensus on abortion.
Consensus has nothing to do with objective truth. At one time, the consensus was that it was a man's business and no one else's if he wanted to beat his wife. At one time, it was the consensus that it was perfectly acceptable for one human being to own another as property. Even so, most people prefer more restrictions on abortion than there are now.
Who's lying now? I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU and have NEVER heard that the ACLU thinks child porn should be legal. This is one of those "citation needed" moments.
In an amicus curae brief, in the case of New York v. Ferber, the ACLU took the position that it should be legal for the owner of an adult bookstore to sell videos of teenaged boys masturbating. Citation provided.
Now you might argue that the ACLU also claimed that videos of teenaged boys masturbating were not obscene and therefore not child porn, but we all know better.
You've done nothing to show that I'm misrepresenting a thing. Abortion and the morning-after pill are reproductive rights issues, and issues that the tea party tends to come down against.
Plan B, perhaps. Abortion is a homicide issue, it has nothing to do with reproductive rights. You have the right to prevent pregnancy, you do not have the right to kill your child.
You're an ineffective, marginalized nuisance, and you'll never accomplish a thing as far as stopping, or even slowing the number of abortions.
You are incorrect. 2008, the last year of Bush's Presidency, the number of abortions were down to their lowest level since the 1970s.
I think it's preferable to work within the law, but I have no real problem with those who do not. Scott Roeder, Paul Hill and Michael Griffin have prevented thousands of abortions.
Like it or not, abortion and the morning after pill *are* part of reproductive rights issues. You don't get to redefine the argument just because it fits your personal belief system better.
You've got that backwards. We're saying "It should be illegal to kill babies", your side is saying "But these are OUR rights!",
And I didn't claim they do, although since you keep bringing it up, prominent members of the tea party (including Sarah Palin) have said publicly that they don't approve of *any* form of birth control, including by married couples. They haven't said ban, but I'm not comfortable that they wouldn't go down that road if they thought for a second they could.
So, since you can now see into the future, tell me what the next series of Powerball numbers will be.
And people like me think it's not your business to butt into other people's lives.
Every wife-beater and child rapist in the world agree with you.
Oh yeah, it's almost exactly the same, except for the part about there being nearly universal consensus that child-porn should be illegal, and the fact that the "no abortion" crowd is a minority.
The ACLU happens to think that both should be legal. More over, very few people think there should be "no abortions". I am not among them. I believe that abortion should be legal to save the life or physical health of the mother.
See, there's another charming feature of the tea party members, the propensity to scream "LIAR" any time they don't agree with or believe something someone else says. You don't agree with me, fine, nifty, very nice for you.
I'm not a tea party member. I'm just a plain old Republican. I happen to like the tea party, but I'm not one of them.
That does not make me a liar. Calling me one though, over and over, proves only that you're not interested in debate, and you have no actual interest in trying to sway my opinion, you just want a chance to have a public tantrum and still somehow feel good about it.
I like Coca Cola, you may like Pepsi, that's a difference of opinion. Neither person in that context would be lying. You, on the other hand, are misrepresenting the facts regarding this issue. That does make you a liar. I'm not trying to sway your opinion. You seem to think that the exchange is about you and me. It's not. The exchange is about the observers.
Your position is based on obfuscation and bullshit. No one wants to ban hormonal birth control or your "plenty of other things". People, like me, want a ban to abortion on demand.
Calling abortion on demand "reproductive rights" is very much akin to calling child pornography "free speech". And yes, I would get just as angry if you were to make such an asinine statement.
That's not what makes you a liar. What makes you a liar is that you're pretending that there is any other controversy in regards to "reproductive rights".
Don't use euphemisms, you don't really mean "reproductive rights", what you mean is "abortion on demand". You will not find one person in the Tea Party who wants to ban condoms or hormonal birth control.
Exactly. We don't need laws to convince us to do something cheaper and better. We didn't need laws outlawing horse drawn carriages, people saw what they wanted and chose it freely.
If CFL lights were so much better, they would win on the even playing field of the market.
Some lights in my house are CFL, some are incandescent. I am sensitive to 60hz lights and many of them give me headaches, so I don't like to use them in my bedroom.
Works for lightbulbs. Dispite the popular ramblings of the internet, neither the EU nor US have actually banned incandescent bulbs - they just set efficiency standards high enough that no incandescent can achieve them.
Just because you don't use the word "ban", doesn't mean it's not really a ban.
Did you buy your router to store and process data?
Actually, yes I did. I called a friend from Best Buy and had him check the dd-wrt website to see if it was compatible. I bought my router because I could run a linux distro on it.
domestic violence is a serious problem. most of it is done by men. it's simply not funny
That's simply not true. The truth of the matter is that women initiate domestic violence just as often as men. The disparity in upper body strength between men and women means that in a mutual combat situation, the women gets hurt worse. Men who sustain minor injuries are less likely to report them to police. The minor injuries that a men receives in a domestic assault can usually be explained away with 'guy stuff', was working on the truck and a wrench slipped, etc...
My fiancee had placenta previa when she was pregnant with our daughter, I took her to the hospital because she was bleeding. They contrived some bullshit reason to get us into separate rooms and asked her if she had been hit! Hospital policy...
You also discount the very real problem of lesbian domestic violence. It isn't that men beat women, it's not that women beat men, it's that people beat people.
but is condemned by religious morons because they don't allow pleasure that does not directly result in reproduction
Every "group" wishes to control others by limiting their access to pleasure. In some cases it's sex, in other cases it's recreational drug use or eating meat or drinking or smoking.
I suppose I could use the same trick on rare coins and make as many copies as I want without taking your rare coin. However, flooding the market with many copies of a rare coin would dilute the value of each individual coin, causing your coin to lose value even though I have not taken it from you.
Monetary value isn't an inherent thing. The value of SCO's operating system fell through the floor when linux got popular, that doesn't mean that anyone did anything wrong. If you could produce exact copies of that rare coin and were honest with the people you were selling it to, you wouldn't have done anything wrong.
I'm not suggesting that this programmer didn't do anything wrong, but I'm suggesting that calling it stealing may not be accurate.
Why should it be a civil matter? Would you feel differently if he stole office furniture and had a thriving side business selling that stolen property? How is this different just because it was only a bunch of bits formed into code that can be compiled? Should it really be treated differently than stealing and selling anything else from the company?
Yes, because stealing some tangible property means that the rightful owner loses it. If you have an apple and I steal it, you no longer have an apple. If you have a painting and I copy it a thousand times, you still have your painting.
Both polls were Gallup. Why would one be more accurate than the other?
A majority of Americans believe that abortion should be legal. "Pro-life" is just a religious label. There are "pro-life" people who believe abortion should remain legal.
Where is your proof? Where is your link? Making something up isn't proof.
"Penny wise"? You are a fucking monster. A moralistic monster.
If you can, in any sense, consider the murder of a doctor even a penny's worth of "wise" you are the perfect, hypocritical theocrat.
Try preparation H, it soothes the butthurt.
It was penny wise because Tiller will never kill another baby. Scott Roeder's actions saved thousands of lives, but his actions will also cost millions of lives because assholes like you will try to turn Tiller into a martyr and hold up restrictions on abortion.
I'm still waiting for you to tell us what you know of what I believe about God.
You're "morals" are not worth a shit.
I just got a clear picture of you who are, Lord Kano, a middle-aged, single white man who hates the idea that there are women out there having sex without consequences.
May your name be erased from the Book of Life.
You couldn't be further from the truth. I'm in my mid 30s, I'm black and I'm not single. Thanks for playing.
And at what point during the pregnancy does the magic event happen where the unborn child = the born child?
Immaterial. When the unborn child has a heartbeat and brain activity, it can be protected under law.
The rest of us, no matter what gender do not get a say.
Don't be such a pussy. We ALL get to have a say. If you want to opt out of yours, be my guest.
Not you, not me, and not Scott Roeder, the hero of the pro-life movement (although none will admit it).
Scott Roeder's actions were penny wise and pound foolish. Yes, Tiller will not kill another baby again but his death will be valuable propaganda for the pro-aborts. It will make it more difficult to reverse Roe v Wade.
Your god does not get a say either, by the way.
Tell us, what's my God's name? What does my God command of me? If you don't know, then you're just talking out of your ass.
So the fact that a growing majority of Americans believe that abortion should be legal is something that you disregard?
According to the poll, 57% believed abortion should be legal in "all or most cases", and 88% believed it should be legal when the life of the mother is at risk.
The poll that you just made up is less accurate than the poll conducted by Gallop.
23% believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. 22% believe abortion should be legal in all circumstances. 53% believe that abortion should be legal under certain (rape/incest/life of the mother) circumstance. In other words, 75% of Americans favor more abortion restrictions.
49% of women are pro-life. 44% of women are pro abortion.
54% of men are pro-life. %49 of men are pro abortion.
Now you get to tell me how "Americans once believed slavery should be legal" and I'm going to say "But your argument was that "The only pepole who are pro-abortion are radical feminists, blah blah".
Think again. Now is when I recap and tell you that you're full of shit and making up numbers doesn't compare to published poll results.
Are you saying the majority of Americans are radical feminists, uninformed leftists and men who want to use women for sex?
The majority of Americans that you imagined are. In the real world, not so much.
Clearly. You don't know more than Jon Stewart tells you. Let me recap for you.
Negro = Human Being Unborn Child = Human Being
If women decided the issue, there would be no elective abortions. Women are more pro-life than men. The only people who are pro-abortion are radical feminists, uninformed leftists and men who want to use women for sex.
Dred Scott determined that blacks were not citizens and hence had no rights that whites were legally bound to respect. It's the constitution that says that blacks are 3/5 of a person.
Otherwise, I agree, Roe v Wade is the Dred Scott case of the 20th century. Abortion is the slavery of the modern era.
Slashdot Mirror
That is all.
LK
One guy does not a political party make, and Byrd seemed to have changed his ways before the end anyway.
He quit saying nigger in public, otherwise he was the same piece of shit until the day he died.
LK
Ask your friendly local KKK representative which way he votes. I bet it ain't Democrat.
Robert Byrd wasn't a Republican.
LK
It's easy for Google to call software patents junk when their primary source of income is advertising. They can afford to give all their software away (or provide access to it online, whatever) for free. Microsoft, on the other hand, relies on its software to make money.
You have conflated Software Patents and Copyright.
LK
You, clearly, don't know what a threat is.
We may be done here, but like I said. You can choose to deal with people like me, or you will have to deal with people like them.
LK
Your opinion does not constitute fact.
Technically true, but unimportant. I'm talking about facts.
Your opinion does not constitute objective truth.
Also technically correct, but unimportant. I am talking about objective truth.
Do you not understand NY v Ferber, or are you being deliberately disingenuous?
Oh, I understand the case. It's nonsensical to suggest that the ACLU filed an amicus curae brief in this case that had nothing to do with the case. The ACLU was arguing that videos of teenaged boys masturbating were not obscene and therefore were covered by the first amendment.
Again, your opinion.
No, objective fact. How many counts of murder was Scott Peterson convicted of? One of those two was an unborn child. The law recognizes that the unborn child is a person under the law.
Safe, legal, and rare is the common meme. Nobody wants that number to actually go up, it's always preferable for them to go down.
And for this, I ask why? Because you know that it's wrong. Because you know that it's the killing of a defenseless human being.
So you support lawlessness and murder.
Defense of others is an affirmative defense to charges of murder.
Don't come back with "abortion is murder", that's a point that is opinion, not fact.
No, it's murder. Definition 5 to be exact.
The three people that you named and are okay with are, unarguably, murderers.
That's a problem for you. You can deal with people like me, or you will have to deal with people like them.
I won't shoot you, but they will.
LK
Yeah, it's impossible to not know what your "side" is saying. Have you considered that part of the reason you can't convince people who don't agree with you is the shrill tone you take?
The people who disagree are immune to persuasion with facts and information.
But again, there's almost universal consensus that wife-beating and child-raping is wrong. Come back when you have the same level of consensus on abortion.
Consensus has nothing to do with objective truth. At one time, the consensus was that it was a man's business and no one else's if he wanted to beat his wife. At one time, it was the consensus that it was perfectly acceptable for one human being to own another as property. Even so, most people prefer more restrictions on abortion than there are now.
Who's lying now? I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU and have NEVER heard that the ACLU thinks child porn should be legal. This is one of those "citation needed" moments.
In an amicus curae brief, in the case of New York v. Ferber, the ACLU took the position that it should be legal for the owner of an adult bookstore to sell videos of teenaged boys masturbating. Citation provided.
Now you might argue that the ACLU also claimed that videos of teenaged boys masturbating were not obscene and therefore not child porn, but we all know better.
You've done nothing to show that I'm misrepresenting a thing. Abortion and the morning-after pill are reproductive rights issues, and issues that the tea party tends to come down against.
Plan B, perhaps. Abortion is a homicide issue, it has nothing to do with reproductive rights. You have the right to prevent pregnancy, you do not have the right to kill your child.
You're an ineffective, marginalized nuisance, and you'll never accomplish a thing as far as stopping, or even slowing the number of abortions.
You are incorrect. 2008, the last year of Bush's Presidency, the number of abortions were down to their lowest level since the 1970s.
I think it's preferable to work within the law, but I have no real problem with those who do not. Scott Roeder, Paul Hill and Michael Griffin have prevented thousands of abortions.
LK
Like it or not, abortion and the morning after pill *are* part of reproductive rights issues. You don't get to redefine the argument just because it fits your personal belief system better.
You've got that backwards. We're saying "It should be illegal to kill babies", your side is saying "But these are OUR rights!",
And I didn't claim they do, although since you keep bringing it up, prominent members of the tea party (including Sarah Palin) have said publicly that they don't approve of *any* form of birth control, including by married couples. They haven't said ban, but I'm not comfortable that they wouldn't go down that road if they thought for a second they could.
So, since you can now see into the future, tell me what the next series of Powerball numbers will be.
And people like me think it's not your business to butt into other people's lives.
Every wife-beater and child rapist in the world agree with you.
Oh yeah, it's almost exactly the same, except for the part about there being nearly universal consensus that child-porn should be illegal, and the fact that the "no abortion" crowd is a minority.
The ACLU happens to think that both should be legal. More over, very few people think there should be "no abortions". I am not among them. I believe that abortion should be legal to save the life or physical health of the mother.
See, there's another charming feature of the tea party members, the propensity to scream "LIAR" any time they don't agree with or believe something someone else says. You don't agree with me, fine, nifty, very nice for you.
I'm not a tea party member. I'm just a plain old Republican. I happen to like the tea party, but I'm not one of them.
That does not make me a liar. Calling me one though, over and over, proves only that you're not interested in debate, and you have no actual interest in trying to sway my opinion, you just want a chance to have a public tantrum and still somehow feel good about it.
I like Coca Cola, you may like Pepsi, that's a difference of opinion. Neither person in that context would be lying. You, on the other hand, are misrepresenting the facts regarding this issue. That does make you a liar. I'm not trying to sway your opinion. You seem to think that the exchange is about you and me. It's not. The exchange is about the observers.
LK
Your position is based on obfuscation and bullshit. No one wants to ban hormonal birth control or your "plenty of other things". People, like me, want a ban to abortion on demand.
Calling abortion on demand "reproductive rights" is very much akin to calling child pornography "free speech". And yes, I would get just as angry if you were to make such an asinine statement.
That's not what makes you a liar. What makes you a liar is that you're pretending that there is any other controversy in regards to "reproductive rights".
LK
Don't use euphemisms, you don't really mean "reproductive rights", what you mean is "abortion on demand". You will not find one person in the Tea Party who wants to ban condoms or hormonal birth control.
Fucking liar.
LK
Exactly. We don't need laws to convince us to do something cheaper and better. We didn't need laws outlawing horse drawn carriages, people saw what they wanted and chose it freely.
If CFL lights were so much better, they would win on the even playing field of the market.
Some lights in my house are CFL, some are incandescent. I am sensitive to 60hz lights and many of them give me headaches, so I don't like to use them in my bedroom.
LK
Tell us, what are their interests?
If you think you know what is against them, you must know what they are.
LK
Works for lightbulbs. Dispite the popular ramblings of the internet, neither the EU nor US have actually banned incandescent bulbs - they just set efficiency standards high enough that no incandescent can achieve them.
Just because you don't use the word "ban", doesn't mean it's not really a ban.
LK
Did you buy your router to store and process data?
Actually, yes I did. I called a friend from Best Buy and had him check the dd-wrt website to see if it was compatible. I bought my router because I could run a linux distro on it.
LK
domestic violence is a serious problem. most of it is done by men. it's simply not funny
That's simply not true. The truth of the matter is that women initiate domestic violence just as often as men. The disparity in upper body strength between men and women means that in a mutual combat situation, the women gets hurt worse. Men who sustain minor injuries are less likely to report them to police. The minor injuries that a men receives in a domestic assault can usually be explained away with 'guy stuff', was working on the truck and a wrench slipped, etc...
My fiancee had placenta previa when she was pregnant with our daughter, I took her to the hospital because she was bleeding. They contrived some bullshit reason to get us into separate rooms and asked her if she had been hit! Hospital policy...
You also discount the very real problem of lesbian domestic violence. It isn't that men beat women, it's not that women beat men, it's that people beat people.
LK
but is condemned by religious morons because they don't allow pleasure that does not directly result in reproduction
Every "group" wishes to control others by limiting their access to pleasure. In some cases it's sex, in other cases it's recreational drug use or eating meat or drinking or smoking.
It's all about control.
LK
I suppose I could use the same trick on rare coins and make as many copies as I want without taking your rare coin. However, flooding the market with many copies of a rare coin would dilute the value of each individual coin, causing your coin to lose value even though I have not taken it from you.
Monetary value isn't an inherent thing. The value of SCO's operating system fell through the floor when linux got popular, that doesn't mean that anyone did anything wrong. If you could produce exact copies of that rare coin and were honest with the people you were selling it to, you wouldn't have done anything wrong.
I'm not suggesting that this programmer didn't do anything wrong, but I'm suggesting that calling it stealing may not be accurate.
LK
Why should it be a civil matter? Would you feel differently if he stole office furniture and had a thriving side business selling that stolen property? How is this different just because it was only a bunch of bits formed into code that can be compiled? Should it really be treated differently than stealing and selling anything else from the company?
Yes, because stealing some tangible property means that the rightful owner loses it. If you have an apple and I steal it, you no longer have an apple. If you have a painting and I copy it a thousand times, you still have your painting.
LK
Both polls were Gallup. Why would one be more accurate than the other?
A majority of Americans believe that abortion should be legal. "Pro-life" is just a religious label. There are "pro-life" people who believe abortion should remain legal.
Where is your proof? Where is your link? Making something up isn't proof.
LK
"Penny wise"? You are a fucking monster. A moralistic monster.
If you can, in any sense, consider the murder of a doctor even a penny's worth of "wise" you are the perfect, hypocritical theocrat.
Try preparation H, it soothes the butthurt.
It was penny wise because Tiller will never kill another baby. Scott Roeder's actions saved thousands of lives, but his actions will also cost millions of lives because assholes like you will try to turn Tiller into a martyr and hold up restrictions on abortion.
I'm still waiting for you to tell us what you know of what I believe about God.
You're "morals" are not worth a shit.
I just got a clear picture of you who are, Lord Kano, a middle-aged, single white man who hates the idea that there are women out there having sex without consequences.
May your name be erased from the Book of Life.
You couldn't be further from the truth. I'm in my mid 30s, I'm black and I'm not single. Thanks for playing.
LK
What you speak of is called "theft of services".
LK
My router stores configuration data. My router processes DHCP requests. My router transfers packets between the internet and my network.
This judge fucked up.
LK
But does Unborn Child = Born Child?
Doesn't matter.
And at what point during the pregnancy does the magic event happen where the unborn child = the born child?
Immaterial. When the unborn child has a heartbeat and brain activity, it can be protected under law.
The rest of us, no matter what gender do not get a say.
Don't be such a pussy. We ALL get to have a say. If you want to opt out of yours, be my guest.
Not you, not me, and not Scott Roeder, the hero of the pro-life movement (although none will admit it).
Scott Roeder's actions were penny wise and pound foolish. Yes, Tiller will not kill another baby again but his death will be valuable propaganda for the pro-aborts. It will make it more difficult to reverse Roe v Wade.
Your god does not get a say either, by the way.
Tell us, what's my God's name? What does my God command of me? If you don't know, then you're just talking out of your ass.
So the fact that a growing majority of Americans believe that abortion should be legal is something that you disregard?
I disregard all of the pro abortion lies.
And you are lying.
More Americans are pro-life.
According to the poll, 57% believed abortion should be legal in "all or most cases", and 88% believed it should be legal when the life of the mother is at risk.
The poll that you just made up is less accurate than the poll conducted by Gallop.
23% believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. 22% believe abortion should be legal in all circumstances. 53% believe that abortion should be legal under certain (rape/incest/life of the mother) circumstance. In other words, 75% of Americans favor more abortion restrictions.
49% of women are pro-life. 44% of women are pro abortion.
54% of men are pro-life. %49 of men are pro abortion.
Now you get to tell me how "Americans once believed slavery should be legal" and I'm going to say "But your argument was that "The only pepole who are pro-abortion are radical feminists, blah blah".
Think again. Now is when I recap and tell you that you're full of shit and making up numbers doesn't compare to published poll results.
Are you saying the majority of Americans are radical feminists, uninformed leftists and men who want to use women for sex?
The majority of Americans that you imagined are. In the real world, not so much.
LK
Clearly. You don't know more than Jon Stewart tells you.
Let me recap for you.
Negro = Human Being
Unborn Child = Human Being
If women decided the issue, there would be no elective abortions. Women are more pro-life than men. The only people who are pro-abortion are radical feminists, uninformed leftists and men who want to use women for sex.
LK
Almost.
Dred Scott determined that blacks were not citizens and hence had no rights that whites were legally bound to respect.
It's the constitution that says that blacks are 3/5 of a person.
Otherwise, I agree, Roe v Wade is the Dred Scott case of the 20th century. Abortion is the slavery of the modern era.
LK