Yes, damn that government! Except the ones pushing for the more "accurate" WHOIS data is ICANN, a private organization, and the one pushing back is a governmental organization (created by the EU). But don't let facts get in the way of your anti-government diatribe.
Not where I live (European country): you can get an anonymous prepaid SIM card easily - mobile operators often offer them as promotional gifts, too. And you can add money using cash on many small shops.
Moving is not any less of a remedy to a symptom. The only real solution would be to eliminate the noise, but that's probably not a realistic option for OP, so he's trying the next best thing - a way to fix his problem without losing all the benefits of living where he does.
And before you claim there are none, or that they're dwarfed by the drawbacks, guess what: that's subjective.
Supposedly, they are only hypocrites if they personally supported the "killing of brown people". The fact that the majority of the country did or not support the wars doesn't make them hypocrites.
As for the gory scenes in movies, you do realize that nobody actually dies when that happens, right? I don't know about you, but I personally happen to respect real people more than I respect characters of fiction, and that includes watching their deaths.
So many people suddenly "care" about this worthless POS
I have no idea if this is true, but have you considered the fact that they may not actually care about him, but about not wanting to be part of a society that live broadcasts people's suicides, or live chases for that matter?
Personally, I don't live in such society and I can tell you that I'm pretty glad for that fact.
It doesn't really ignore that, since the Pirate Parties don't propose the elimination of copyright (source).
That said, and as someone who is employed to write Free Software, I'm skeptical of the existence of a real need for copyright; the system was created a long time ago when the conditions were massively different, and it exists because it already existed, regardless of the existence or not of a valid reason for it nowadays.
I'm sure copyright has many benefits for most copyright holders, but that's not really its supposed purpose, which is to encourage the creation of new works and inventions, and I believe that these would appear any way. We might even get a reduction in quantity but improvement in average quality.
That said, "copyright and patents" as a whole is impossible to speak about, since the differences between markets (e.g. B2B software and Pop music) are so great that what applies to one may be completely wrong for the other.
You are criticizing GP based on an unsupported assumption that he would find that bad. Personally, I don't: more parties are good, even if they are neo-Nazi, since they force the discussion around "unpleasant" topics like racism. That said, I wouldn't see neo-Nazis getting elected as a good thing, but any stretch of the imagination.
It's relevant to mention that ACAPOR is the association of video clubs (like Blockbuster), and they're mostly butthurt that people have moved on much like everywhere else (exacerbated by the fact that our salaries are low and the internet speeds are reasonable).
Not really. Our film industry is divided between the commercial producers, which only makes crap for the least common denominator (like the Morangos, which is one of those teenage soaps/dramas played by unknown "actors"), and the artistic producers, which live off government subsidies and make stuff nobody but the critics watch.
We had a streak of great movies in the 40s and 50s, but the rest barely registers.
Unfortunately it won't, since the state of our economy will prevent any increase. For all intents and purposes we're the next Greece: bankrupt, with huge unemployment and surviving with bailout money that only increases our debt.
I extremely skeptical of the productive value of talking to completely random people who just happen to be at the same office as you. Talking to people can certainly be extremely productive, but it's the right people, not just anyone.
1) Some people think it's OK to consume animals or animal produce, and when you do that, you want to look after the animals in the best way possible;
Then the people who want to consume the animals or their produce can pay for the more expensive bulbs by the means of increased prices (which is probably an insignificant part of the final price anyway).
2) A lot of people take care of the animals that others haven't been able to take care of - you can't just release that rare lizard into the nearest park.
Sure, but many bulbs does that really take compared to chicken coops and such? It's probably irrelevant. Paying the higher prices in those cases is still cheap compared to the cost of keeping bulb prices low.
As for 1, there's probably no nicer life for a chicken than chilling on a well-stocked croft laying eggs for the humans. The idea that leaving an animal feral to face all the nastiness of nature, except where it is clear that you are placing it into a completely inadequate environment (consider caging big cats), is somehow "respecting" it? Gaia bullshit. Would it be respecting you to leave you in a jungle in the middle of Africa?
If I was born and never left the jungle, I don't see why not. I'm not saying one should just dump the chickens they already have into the wilderness. I'm saying that if you don't want to pay for the bulbs, don't get chickens in the first place.
The idea that chickens in coops are lucky because they have better lives than otherwise is false, because those chickens wouldn't be born in the first place if there weren't people buying them. Chickens are bred and raised for selling, not captured from the wilderness.
And even a beast-hugging vegan like myself has no problems with 2. All my cats, for example, have been ex-stray/abandoned.
Same here. But I don't go around whining that my cats "deserve" cheap food or litter boxes, which is what I'm speaking against.
It's because you're burning fuel, usually coal, going many steps to transform it into electricity, to transport it along lines with resistive losses, to transform voltages, etc whereas with fuel right at your house, you burn it, it heats either the air direct (venting system) or water that heats the environment (radiant systems).
But what about all the losses are occured between the radiation beeing outputted by the sun, and it being converted into oil and gas?
You can argue those aren't relevant, but electricity losses aren't really important either; what is important is the cost* to actually get the effect you want (e.g. raise the house temperature by N degrees), and that may or may not be correlated with efficiency.
* When I say cost, I don't mean just money, but also externalities like pollution.
The birds deserve incandescent bulbs? Oh, man, should we start fitting every tree with one?
The birds live just fine if left alone. You only need bulbs if you plan to trap them (who's really disrespecting them?). If you don't want to pay for bulbs, guess what: you don't have to! Just leave birds alone! And the same for pet reptile owners, obviously.
But she didn't really demonize the bikes/benefits, she demonized the theft/taxes that paid for them. And yes, she benefited from the system, but she was also forced to pay into it, much like the guy who benefits from the bike was forced to give up the car.
Again, I have no sympathy for Rand, but you can't force people into a system and then call them hypocrites because they want to recoup their losses.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, damn that government! Except the ones pushing for the more "accurate" WHOIS data is ICANN, a private organization, and the one pushing back is a governmental organization (created by the EU). But don't let facts get in the way of your anti-government diatribe.
Yes: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6128a8.htm?s_cid=mm6128a8_w
phone numbers can be traced to an owner
Not where I live (European country): you can get an anonymous prepaid SIM card easily - mobile operators often offer them as promotional gifts, too. And you can add money using cash on many small shops.
Moving is not any less of a remedy to a symptom. The only real solution would be to eliminate the noise, but that's probably not a realistic option for OP, so he's trying the next best thing - a way to fix his problem without losing all the benefits of living where he does.
And before you claim there are none, or that they're dwarfed by the drawbacks, guess what: that's subjective.
Supposedly, they are only hypocrites if they personally supported the "killing of brown people". The fact that the majority of the country did or not support the wars doesn't make them hypocrites.
As for the gory scenes in movies, you do realize that nobody actually dies when that happens, right? I don't know about you, but I personally happen to respect real people more than I respect characters of fiction, and that includes watching their deaths.
So many people suddenly "care" about this worthless POS
I have no idea if this is true, but have you considered the fact that they may not actually care about him, but about not wanting to be part of a society that live broadcasts people's suicides, or live chases for that matter?
Personally, I don't live in such society and I can tell you that I'm pretty glad for that fact.
That seems hard to believe, since the elderly have an higher suicide rate than the average. Got any sources on that?
It doesn't really ignore that, since the Pirate Parties don't propose the elimination of copyright (source).
That said, and as someone who is employed to write Free Software, I'm skeptical of the existence of a real need for copyright; the system was created a long time ago when the conditions were massively different, and it exists because it already existed, regardless of the existence or not of a valid reason for it nowadays.
I'm sure copyright has many benefits for most copyright holders, but that's not really its supposed purpose, which is to encourage the creation of new works and inventions, and I believe that these would appear any way. We might even get a reduction in quantity but improvement in average quality.
That said, "copyright and patents" as a whole is impossible to speak about, since the differences between markets (e.g. B2B software and Pop music) are so great that what applies to one may be completely wrong for the other.
Pretty sure they also fight for more government transparency and more citizen privacy.
That said, the value of a one issue party is that they influence other parties for capturing their vote.
You are criticizing GP based on an unsupported assumption that he would find that bad. Personally, I don't: more parties are good, even if they are neo-Nazi, since they force the discussion around "unpleasant" topics like racism. That said, I wouldn't see neo-Nazis getting elected as a good thing, but any stretch of the imagination.
There's no law of nature prevent copyleft form being implemented using any other way besides copyright. Like, you know, writing a law.
That said, some of us would still gladly make the trade, even if we defend copyleft as long as copyright exists.
And they're perfectly secure.
Ahahahah! Oh man, you must be great in parties!
http://news.softpedia.com/news/JPMorgan-Chase-Bank-Server-Hacked-Tiffany-Employee-Details-Exposed-294557.shtml
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9116933/Report_World_Bank_servers_breached_repeatedly
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/12/bank_server_breached/
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-13711528
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/062612-operation-high-roller-260478.html
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9033999/Bank_of_India_site_hacked_serves_up_22_exploits
http://www.net-security.org/news.php?id=3181
And this was just with a 5m search.
It's relevant to mention that ACAPOR is the association of video clubs (like Blockbuster), and they're mostly butthurt that people have moved on much like everywhere else (exacerbated by the fact that our salaries are low and the internet speeds are reasonable).
Don't worry: we already didn't. With 15% unemployment, low wages and crushing taxes, we wouldn't be able to afford it anyway.
Not really. Our film industry is divided between the commercial producers, which only makes crap for the least common denominator (like the Morangos, which is one of those teenage soaps/dramas played by unknown "actors"), and the artistic producers, which live off government subsidies and make stuff nobody but the critics watch.
We had a streak of great movies in the 40s and 50s, but the rest barely registers.
Unfortunately it won't, since the state of our economy will prevent any increase. For all intents and purposes we're the next Greece: bankrupt, with huge unemployment and surviving with bailout money that only increases our debt.
If playing Angry Birds or reading random stuff online beats having sex with such guy, the problem is not the smartphone.
http://www.stumbleupon.com/
You're welcome.
I'm sure I could, but why would I?
I extremely skeptical of the productive value of talking to completely random people who just happen to be at the same office as you. Talking to people can certainly be extremely productive, but it's the right people, not just anyone.
I think parent's point is that MS could have bought but not actually used the electricity.
1) Some people think it's OK to consume animals or animal produce, and when you do that, you want to look after the animals in the best way possible;
Then the people who want to consume the animals or their produce can pay for the more expensive bulbs by the means of increased prices (which is probably an insignificant part of the final price anyway).
2) A lot of people take care of the animals that others haven't been able to take care of - you can't just release that rare lizard into the nearest park.
Sure, but many bulbs does that really take compared to chicken coops and such? It's probably irrelevant. Paying the higher prices in those cases is still cheap compared to the cost of keeping bulb prices low.
As for 1, there's probably no nicer life for a chicken than chilling on a well-stocked croft laying eggs for the humans. The idea that leaving an animal feral to face all the nastiness of nature, except where it is clear that you are placing it into a completely inadequate environment (consider caging big cats), is somehow "respecting" it? Gaia bullshit. Would it be respecting you to leave you in a jungle in the middle of Africa?
If I was born and never left the jungle, I don't see why not. I'm not saying one should just dump the chickens they already have into the wilderness. I'm saying that if you don't want to pay for the bulbs, don't get chickens in the first place.
The idea that chickens in coops are lucky because they have better lives than otherwise is false, because those chickens wouldn't be born in the first place if there weren't people buying them. Chickens are bred and raised for selling, not captured from the wilderness.
And even a beast-hugging vegan like myself has no problems with 2. All my cats, for example, have been ex-stray/abandoned.
Same here. But I don't go around whining that my cats "deserve" cheap food or litter boxes, which is what I'm speaking against.
It's because you're burning fuel, usually coal, going many steps to transform it into electricity, to transport it along lines with resistive losses, to transform voltages, etc whereas with fuel right at your house, you burn it, it heats either the air direct (venting system) or water that heats the environment (radiant systems).
But what about all the losses are occured between the radiation beeing outputted by the sun, and it being converted into oil and gas?
You can argue those aren't relevant, but electricity losses aren't really important either; what is important is the cost* to actually get the effect you want (e.g. raise the house temperature by N degrees), and that may or may not be correlated with efficiency.
* When I say cost, I don't mean just money, but also externalities like pollution.
The birds deserve incandescent bulbs? Oh, man, should we start fitting every tree with one?
The birds live just fine if left alone. You only need bulbs if you plan to trap them (who's really disrespecting them?). If you don't want to pay for bulbs, guess what: you don't have to! Just leave birds alone! And the same for pet reptile owners, obviously.
So? What makes you a special snowflake deserving cheap heating incandescents?
But she didn't really demonize the bikes/benefits, she demonized the theft/taxes that paid for them. And yes, she benefited from the system, but she was also forced to pay into it, much like the guy who benefits from the bike was forced to give up the car.
Again, I have no sympathy for Rand, but you can't force people into a system and then call them hypocrites because they want to recoup their losses.