"They aren't trying to track terrorists here. They are trying to play mind control. They are trying to censor the publics thoughts."
Do you really think the issue in america is really terrorists? terrorists are about a big a deal as asteroid hits, yes it could happen, yes it's good to watch for, no it isn't worth shitting all over peoples rights to deal utterly ineffectively with the slim chance of it doing any real damage any time soon.
In china the difference is that you can be defined as a terrorist if powerful people simply don't like you... hhhmm... not that far from the US then.
"I'm specifically talking about people who got AIDS through unprotected, consensual sexual activity, no one else." But the ignorant partners could very well have got AIDS through unprotected, consensual sexual activity. Say they're trying for a child but their partner was less than faithful? That's not a red herring. Is it their fault as well?
Fucking holier than thou moralistic assholes. Unless you've never had sex then your belief that you are somehow proof against getting it hinges entirely on your partner being as faithful as you think they are.
"Never let a computer do a job that can be done by a human." I just can't agree with this. People can be fooled easily enough and the more that's automated properly the better. A human(well thousands of them) *could* do all the interest calculations at your bank but it would be stupid to do it that way.
There are loads of jobs out there which are better done by machines.
I'm advocating for the poor souls who've been suffering for years and who you now say shouldn't try to stop their suffering. Why should the people on the first island be expected to suffer for the sake of others when there's a way for them to protect themselves?
Do you trust your partner? Are you sure they haven't had sex with anyone else in the last 8 years? How are you sure? Do you follow your partner everywhere or do you take their word for it?
The fact is that unless your the sort of untrusting controlling asshole who nobody wants to stay involved with then your partner could have had sex with someone else. And if you catch AIDS as a result it is entirely your own fault.
Monogamy doesn't go far enough! complete celibacy for life is the only way to be sure!
Well you can avoid almost all serious diseases by simply not socialising with anyone and not having sex with anyone. Ever. There's always the chance that any partner could catch a serious disease in an unusual way or be unfaithful without your knowledge so the safest thing to do is avoid all sexual contact.
Sure the drive to have sex with at least one person is a natural instinct but as you said, people shouldn't just give in to instincts. See where I'm going with this? Most people enjoy socialising rather than avoiding human contact whenever possible but the responsible thing to do is to seal yourself into your house and get a job where you can telecommute to cut down on human contact.
Seems to me that it just comes down to the fact that people want it more than they are worried about consequences from it rather than any actual reasoned view that justifies non-virginity. Which, ironically, is about the same reasoning by people who steal, kill, and rape (i.e., they don't put much thought into justifying it...they just do it).
The idea that resisting instincts is somehow bad isn't one of them. Resisting basic instincts is part of what it means to have a civilization!!!111!!!!
oh for fucks sake. the islands were not built by anyone. There is no design.
And this "dumping the problem onto the next guy" thing is about as retarded as claiming that building earthquake proof buildings will lead just make the earthquake worse for everyone else.
"just because you run to the patent office with your money in hand doesn't mean you get to patent 'the wheel' or 'automobiles' or 'the page down key'."
Ya but say lots of people do the same as you and their sales drop off sharply. "It's pirates! Nobody's buying it because of those damn pirates!!!" it won't even be considered that people simply aren't buying it because of the DRM.
God I hate the "paedophile issue". Yes paedophiles exist. No, none of these schemes will do much to stop abuse since the vast majority of abuse is by a family member of friend.
And yet idiots who read the Sun et al are willing to accept anything in the name of fighting paedophiles. It's the biggest hole in the armour of the civil rights movement too. Since any legislation can be pushed through no matter how absurd if you say it's to combat paedophiles. Said legislation can then be used to arrest whoever you like etc and nobody wants to get killed by a lynch mob for defending "paedophiles"
Socialy it's a crime you can't even be found innocent of. If a court finds someone innocent no matter how rock solid their defence then "you never know! people are always getting off on technicalities! I saw it in a movie!!".
well there is a finite chance that there is no such thing as gravity and ever since the universe came into being all the objects, gas etc have merely coalesed into bodies by chance and every time you drop an object it only moves "down" by chance. if you have a 2 compartment box with a divider, one compartment a perfect vacum, the other filled with gas then open the divider and one minute later close it again there is a finite(although stupidly unlikey) chance that all the molecles in the gas will be on one side of the divider. Nothing is 100% certain, "facts" are merely things which are extremely unlikely to be chance. Certainty is for priests and children.
is just to fire all the unhappy people, or make sure the reasons they're unhappy get a non disclosure clause attached.
I'm curious what the power of this thing is? If someone complains and discloses that their app was rejected then will they be forbidden from making any more apps or could they be sued/proseuted?
this really might achieve more than a thousand angsty gamers complaining about it on message boards. "direct financial liability" speaks louder than "unhappy players"
You forgot that many take advantage of both patents and trade secrets. How many of the patents filed could really be used to build a working example of the product? That's the goal yet companies will patent a vague description to make it hard for others to copy even using the patent material after it has expired.
The way you guys deal with drug problems
on
Spiders On Drugs
·
· Score: 1
Seriously America has the most foolish way of dealing with drug crime. "We're having a problem with this so lets create a situation where there will be a group of people who stand to make a profit by convincing more people to use drugs" It's like prohibition all over again: who gained the most from that? Why the mob of course. Want to hurt drug lords? Then drive the price of their product into the ground by supplying it to addicts cheaply with the advantage that if the government supplies the cheap drugs to them then they don't have the same motive to expand the market.If you take that approach it's a matter of simply not pushing the drugs to new users.
I've heard that during prohibition that foreign alcohol producers were one of the groups that lobbied to keep prohibition[citation needed] because consumption didn't drop, it increased and import taxes just disappeared.
Every now and then I see some piece of code which uses methods which I can honestly say I would never have thought of, really novel ideas. Those should be patentable but there's so much trivial shit that is only original to the extent that the patent examiner can't recognise it through the obfuscated drivel and legal challenges are far too expensive for the little guy. In such a situation riting a piece of software is akin to playing hopscotch through a minefield.
unless you're the owner of a small software company which is having problems because you can sit down and write something useful you thought up yourself, sell it as your product and then get sued for infringing a patent held by some company which does nothing but patent vague ideas and sue people.
Oh god memories. My school had a class in the computer room... not sure I'd call it IT.
Covered basic word and excel. The teacher was a nice guy but only one lesson ahead of the students. I remember explaining things like DNS and https to him.
Imagine you were put in a classroom with a load of infants chanting basic sums "2 plus 2 is 4, 2 plus 3 is 5" etc.
When there is no purpose in you being there how long before you get so sick of it that you stop turning up?
That isn't lazyness. Lazyness is being unwilling to work. The "work" in this case is learing math and if he already knew all the material that well then it just means he did all the "work" long before everyone else.
I hope to god you're not a teacher.
I slept through most of my 1st year computer sciene lectures and still came top of my class. Why? I read the books, did the assignments and studied the material as soon as I got them rather than wait to be pushed to leaving me painfully bored in class. But if you want to call that lazyness...
Slashdot Mirror
"They aren't trying to track terrorists here. They are trying to play mind control. They are trying to censor the publics thoughts."
Do you really think the issue in america is really terrorists? terrorists are about a big a deal as asteroid hits, yes it could happen, yes it's good to watch for, no it isn't worth shitting all over peoples rights to deal utterly ineffectively with the slim chance of it doing any real damage any time soon.
In china the difference is that you can be defined as a terrorist if powerful people simply don't like you... hhhmm... not that far from the US then.
"I'm specifically talking about people who got AIDS through unprotected, consensual sexual activity, no one else."
But the ignorant partners could very well have got AIDS through unprotected, consensual sexual activity. Say they're trying for a child but their partner was less than faithful?
That's not a red herring.
Is it their fault as well?
Fucking holier than thou moralistic assholes.
Unless you've never had sex then your belief that you are somehow proof against getting it hinges entirely on your partner being as faithful as you think they are.
"Never let a computer do a job that can be done by a human."
I just can't agree with this.
People can be fooled easily enough and the more that's automated properly the better. A human(well thousands of them) *could* do all the interest calculations at your bank but it would be stupid to do it that way.
There are loads of jobs out there which are better done by machines.
I'm advocating for the poor souls who've been suffering for years and who you now say shouldn't try to stop their suffering. Why should the people on the first island be expected to suffer for the sake of others when there's a way for them to protect themselves?
Do you trust your partner?
Are you sure they haven't had sex with anyone else in the last 8 years?
How are you sure? Do you follow your partner everywhere or do you take their word for it?
The fact is that unless your the sort of untrusting controlling asshole who nobody wants to stay involved with then your partner could have had sex with someone else.
And if you catch AIDS as a result it is entirely your own fault.
Monogamy doesn't go far enough! complete celibacy for life is the only way to be sure!
Well you can avoid almost all serious diseases by simply not socialising with anyone and not having sex with anyone. Ever. There's always the chance that any partner could catch a serious disease in an unusual way or be unfaithful without your knowledge so the safest thing to do is avoid all sexual contact.
Sure the drive to have sex with at least one person is a natural instinct but as you said, people shouldn't just give in to instincts. See where I'm going with this? Most people enjoy socialising rather than avoiding human contact whenever possible but the responsible thing to do is to seal yourself into your house and get a job where you can telecommute to cut down on human contact.
Seems to me that it just comes down to the fact that people want it more than they are worried about consequences from it rather than any actual reasoned view that justifies non-virginity. Which, ironically, is about the same reasoning by people who steal, kill, and rape (i.e., they don't put much thought into justifying it...they just do it).
The idea that resisting instincts is somehow bad isn't one of them. Resisting basic instincts is part of what it means to have a civilization!!!111!!!!
Again with the "put".
No gods or demons decided to put anything anywhere.
Just because you've always gained from someone elses suffering doesn't give you the right to stop them from protecting themselves rather than you.
Don't force other people to suffer because you're stuck up and think that you're the center of the universe.
So I have a duty to take the fall for the people behind me?
oh for fucks sake.
the islands were not built by anyone.
There is no design.
And this "dumping the problem onto the next guy" thing is about as retarded as claiming that building earthquake proof buildings will lead just make the earthquake worse for everyone else.
"just because you run to the patent office with your money in hand doesn't mean you get to patent 'the wheel' or 'automobiles' or 'the page down key'."
or "one click shopping", or linked lists. :-)
Ya but say lots of people do the same as you and their sales drop off sharply.
"It's pirates! Nobody's buying it because of those damn pirates!!!"
it won't even be considered that people simply aren't buying it because of the DRM.
God I hate the "paedophile issue".
Yes paedophiles exist. No, none of these schemes will do much to stop abuse since the vast majority of abuse is by a family member of friend.
And yet idiots who read the Sun et al are willing to accept anything in the name of fighting paedophiles.
It's the biggest hole in the armour of the civil rights movement too. Since any legislation can be pushed through no matter how absurd if you say it's to combat paedophiles. Said legislation can then be used to arrest whoever you like etc and nobody wants to get killed by a lynch mob for defending "paedophiles"
Socialy it's a crime you can't even be found innocent of.
If a court finds someone innocent no matter how rock solid their defence then "you never know! people are always getting off on technicalities! I saw it in a movie!!".
Wonderfully put!
well there is a finite chance that there is no such thing as gravity and ever since the universe came into being all the objects, gas etc have merely coalesed into bodies by chance and every time you drop an object it only moves "down" by chance.
if you have a 2 compartment box with a divider, one compartment a perfect vacum, the other filled with gas then open the divider and one minute later close it again there is a finite(although stupidly unlikey) chance that all the molecles in the gas will be on one side of the divider.
Nothing is 100% certain, "facts" are merely things which are extremely unlikely to be chance.
Certainty is for priests and children.
is just to fire all the unhappy people, or make sure the reasons they're unhappy get a non disclosure clause attached.
I'm curious what the power of this thing is? If someone complains and discloses that their app was rejected then will they be forbidden from making any more apps or could they be sued/proseuted?
this really might achieve more than a thousand angsty gamers complaining about it on message boards. "direct financial liability" speaks louder than "unhappy players"
You forgot that many take advantage of both patents and trade secrets.
How many of the patents filed could really be used to build a working example of the product? That's the goal yet companies will patent a vague description to make it hard for others to copy even using the patent material after it has expired.
Seriously America has the most foolish way of dealing with drug crime.
"We're having a problem with this so lets create a situation where there will be a group of people who stand to make a profit by convincing more people to use drugs"
It's like prohibition all over again:
who gained the most from that? Why the mob of course.
Want to hurt drug lords? Then drive the price of their product into the ground by supplying it to addicts cheaply with the advantage that if the government supplies the cheap drugs to them then they don't have the same motive to expand the market.If you take that approach it's a matter of simply not pushing the drugs to new users.
I've heard that during prohibition that foreign alcohol producers were one of the groups that lobbied to keep prohibition[citation needed] because consumption didn't drop, it increased and import taxes just disappeared.
I was under the impression that most of the protocols like HTTP were not patented?
Every now and then I see some piece of code which uses methods which I can honestly say I would never have thought of, really novel ideas. Those should be patentable but there's so much trivial shit that is only original to the extent that the patent examiner can't recognise it through the obfuscated drivel and legal challenges are far too expensive for the little guy. In such a situation riting a piece of software is akin to playing hopscotch through a minefield.
What? Are pancakes not good enough to get their own day as well?
unless you're the owner of a small software company which is having problems because you can sit down and write something useful you thought up yourself, sell it as your product and then get sued for infringing a patent held by some company which does nothing but patent vague ideas and sue people.
Oh god memories.
My school had a class in the computer room... not sure I'd call it IT.
Covered basic word and excel. The teacher was a nice guy but only one lesson ahead of the students. I remember explaining things like DNS and https to him.
bah!
*learning not learing
*science not sciene
Imagine you were put in a classroom with a load of infants chanting basic sums "2 plus 2 is 4, 2 plus 3 is 5" etc.
When there is no purpose in you being there how long before you get so sick of it that you stop turning up?
That isn't lazyness. Lazyness is being unwilling to work. The "work" in this case is learing math and if he already knew all the material that well then it just means he did all the "work" long before everyone else.
I hope to god you're not a teacher.
I slept through most of my 1st year computer sciene lectures and still came top of my class. Why? I read the books, did the assignments and studied the material as soon as I got them rather than wait to be pushed to leaving me painfully bored in class. But if you want to call that lazyness...