That really is insane... I wonder what the logic was. "Perhaps if we make sure our paying customers get lower quality products than those who pirate perhaps they won't want pirated moveies any more!"
If I turn up to work hung over and as a result cannot do my job I get in trouble. If I turn up glassy eyed and obviously impaired I'm not going to be working there very long.
Obviously hung over and still under the effects of the night before- it doesn't matter if I was drinking while off the clock, if it effects me while on the clock that's good enough. Obviously high and still under the effects of the night before-it doesn't matter if I was smoking something while off the clock, if it effects me while on the clock that's good enough.
If I'm not obviously drunk or high at work they don't give a damn.
Are you comparing roll your own weed to roll your own tobacco? or to filtered cigarets? Package it up like the nations favorite niccotine delivery system and then try comparing them.
How much harder would be be to get a liscence to study the beneficial uses of snake venom than to study the benefits of weed? The problem is that this isn't treated objectively.
I installed this in order to use kate on windows. What can I say: I've grown attached to the editor. But I found that it no longer feels so crisp and clean as on linux.
So he gets a mail with a link to that view which compares every block of text changed and if he thinks it's ok he clicks the button to re-sign. It would make wikipedia a much more valuable resource if you could point to an article signed by a few professors(someone who had identified themselves as a professor at MIT might give a link to their staff page with signature) and hence avoid the snobbish "euch, you're giving me a link to a Wiki? nothing on there is ever true!"
I've wondered occasionally at how practical it would be to have some system where professors/experts in a field could attach a cryptographic signature to an article to show that they believe the contents to be factual and set it up so that whenever there is an edit everyone who has signed the previous version as factual gets a mail with the details of the change.
Would an article on say particle physics signed by a physics professor be a less valid reference than a paper published by the same?
Because your leader doesn't solely belong to you. One of the central tenets of liberty is that the rights of the minority are protected against the tyranny of the majority.
Ok. The I'm overusing the abortion topic but why should you be allowed elect a leader who forces me to be little more than an incubator? Or why should you be allowed elect a leader who forces me to stand idley by while murder is commited? tyranny of the majority!!!
I was expecting people to get the reference but I guess I hoped too much... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came... When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews, I remained silent; I was not a Jew.
When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.
disagreement within certain bounds is fine? great! I think murder is outside those bounds and so anyone who is pro-abortion should not be allowed disagree with me and try to get murder made legal!
Or alternatively I think forcing women to endure the degredation of being little more than an incubator is outside the bounds! Anyone who disagrees with me should not be allowed into public office where they might make it illegal to choose to not incubate a ball of cells.
And so I must not allow them to have the same rights and freedoms that I have since if they did they might not want me to have the same rights and freedoms that they had.
Perhaps if we required everyone to wear shock collars which stunned them whenever they had a violent impulse... it would reduce their freedom but people who would otherwise be murdered would survive! Life before freedom!
Well I think people who are pro-abortion should be banned from running for office too! a genocides worth of children are killed every year thanks to them!!! (I'm pro choice but this is as valid as your argument) And people who think it's alright to murder other humans by running electricity though them after nothing more than a handful of others have decided that they've probably done something bad! People who support those things shouldn't be allowed run for office either! And those communists! They want to take away my property! they shouldn't be allowed run for office either!
Or living in a state where merely walking around naked or taking pictures of yourself can get you labled as a sex offender for life! In such places people do not deserve the right to free speach!!!
And to further this all talk in american media of how egyptions should have basic rights like freedom of speach should be banned since it can only inflame things further. Sure it would hurt some americans rights but that's a small price to pay!
Where did I say a group couldn't be opposed later? I'm as willing to write code to help people sidestep censorship after they've elected the nutjobs and decided it was a bad idea as I am willing to write code to help those who don't like the other kinds of repression. If genocide becomes likely then the UN should step in, they're too slow to be much use but that's another problem.
Slashdot Mirror
That really is insane...
I wonder what the logic was.
"Perhaps if we make sure our paying customers get lower quality products than those who pirate perhaps they won't want pirated moveies any more!"
Stricter legislation! Harsher punishments! Bigger fines! Public whippings!
If I turn up to work hung over and as a result cannot do my job I get in trouble.
If I turn up glassy eyed and obviously impaired I'm not going to be working there very long.
Obviously hung over and still under the effects of the night before- it doesn't matter if I was drinking while off the clock, if it effects me while on the clock that's good enough.
Obviously high and still under the effects of the night before-it doesn't matter if I was smoking something while off the clock, if it effects me while on the clock that's good enough.
If I'm not obviously drunk or high at work they don't give a damn.
Are you comparing roll your own weed to roll your own tobacco? or to filtered cigarets?
Package it up like the nations favorite niccotine delivery system and then try comparing them.
How much harder would be be to get a liscence to study the beneficial uses of snake venom than to study the benefits of weed?
The problem is that this isn't treated objectively.
I installed this in order to use kate on windows. What can I say: I've grown attached to the editor. But I found that it no longer feels so crisp and clean as on linux.
They called it the crusades
I see we're on the same page :D
So he gets a mail with a link to that view which compares every block of text changed and if he thinks it's ok he clicks the button to re-sign.
It would make wikipedia a much more valuable resource if you could point to an article signed by a few professors(someone who had identified themselves as a professor at MIT might give a link to their staff page with signature) and hence avoid the snobbish "euch, you're giving me a link to a Wiki? nothing on there is ever true!"
You say it like there's something wrong with that situation. sounds fantastic to me.
I've wondered occasionally at how practical it would be to have some system where professors/experts in a field could attach a cryptographic signature to an article to show that they believe the contents to be factual and set it up so that whenever there is an edit everyone who has signed the previous version as factual gets a mail with the details of the change.
Would an article on say particle physics signed by a physics professor be a less valid reference than a paper published by the same?
Christianity too! sick!
then let him out watch him and if he actually tries to do it then you stop him and jail him for attempted murder.
bah!
"Has he done anything to end up in prison? If so- has he served his sentence?"
I have principles. They differ from yours.
And for that reason I think you are a danger and should never be allowed to run for public office or to speak in public!
Because your leader doesn't solely belong to you. One of the central tenets of liberty is that the rights of the minority are protected against the tyranny of the majority.
Ok.
The I'm overusing the abortion topic but why should you be allowed elect a leader who forces me to be little more than an incubator?
Or why should you be allowed elect a leader who forces me to stand idley by while murder is commited?
tyranny of the majority!!!
Has he done anything to be in prison? If has he serves his sentence?
And in conclusion this is why these other humans do not deserve the same rights I have.
I was expecting people to get the reference but I guess I hoped too much...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
disagreement within certain bounds is fine?
great! I think murder is outside those bounds and so anyone who is pro-abortion should not be allowed disagree with me and try to get murder made legal!
Or alternatively
I think forcing women to endure the degredation of being little more than an incubator is outside the bounds!
Anyone who disagrees with me should not be allowed into public office where they might make it illegal to choose to not incubate a ball of cells.
Are you getting the point here?
And so I must not allow them to have the same rights and freedoms that I have since if they did they might not want me to have the same rights and freedoms that they had.
plus they hate us for our freedom!!!
Perhaps if we required everyone to wear shock collars which stunned them whenever they had a violent impulse... it would reduce their freedom but people who would otherwise be murdered would survive!
Life before freedom!
Well I think people who are pro-abortion should be banned from running for office too! a genocides worth of children are killed every year thanks to them!!!
(I'm pro choice but this is as valid as your argument)
And people who think it's alright to murder other humans by running electricity though them after nothing more than a handful of others have decided that they've probably done something bad! People who support those things shouldn't be allowed run for office either!
And those communists! They want to take away my property! they shouldn't be allowed run for office either!
Or living in a state where merely walking around naked or taking pictures of yourself can get you labled as a sex offender for life!
In such places people do not deserve the right to free speach!!!
And to further this all talk in american media of how egyptions should have basic rights like freedom of speach should be banned since it can only inflame things further.
Sure it would hurt some americans rights but that's a small price to pay!
Where did I say a group couldn't be opposed later?
I'm as willing to write code to help people sidestep censorship after they've elected the nutjobs and decided it was a bad idea as I am willing to write code to help those who don't like the other kinds of repression.
If genocide becomes likely then the UN should step in, they're too slow to be much use but that's another problem.