you are wrong about him methinks
on
Lawsuits Suck
·
· Score: 1
Nader is against corporations controlling the government and making unsafe products, etc. This does not mean he is for big government as in "oppressive." This means that if a business wants to make money in America, it must abide by the rules and be subject to the will of the people, not the other way around.
I agree with most libertarian values, i.e. personal freedom above all. But unfettered business is destructive. They will lie, cheat, and steal in the pursuit of profit. When an individual breaks the law, he goes to jail or in extreme cases he loses his life! (I disagree with the death penalty because there is no way to guarantee that the convicted is not innocent. Due process and all that, I know, but some people are still murdered by the state. And that is more evil than any DMCA or UCITA don't you think?) A corporation, if the coverup is not complete, might be convicted and may get a large fine. Ouchie. Because a corporation is a profit consuming undying monster, we need a body set up to strictly govern them and make sure they stay in their place. Libertarians seem mostly to be corporate employees, VC's and the like whose "eliminate government!" mantra is really just a self serving wallent expanding point of view.
So I lean more towards Nader, who has a proven track record of protecting the individual, making big business accountable and selflessly serving the public trust. He isn't a lifetime politician, just an intelligent, honest man who has proven his ability to work for YOUR rights over those of BUSINESS. No other candidate has this, hence I will vote for him in November.
Maybe you should too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Most people will die for free for their nation or their god. No one will die for Sony for any amount of money."
this maxim of yours is not true. What is a bodyguard? A mercenary? Even rent-a-cops and 7-11 workers have a signicant risk of death in their jobs. How does reality fit in with your maxim? You don't think it is just a hop skip and jump to private corporate armies? Mark my words friend.
You can label me as a anti-corporate hysterian but the truth is, a corporation is an undying ravenous creature which exists for only ONE purpose: to amass wealth and power and market share. It does not care about the health and well-being of its employees or customers except in context of possible threat to its money diet. Don't ever forget this: corporations are not needed for anything. We should not base laws (IP or otherwise) on what the corporations say they need. Our nation is not dependent on them for our well-being. We as quasi-free individuals in America should realize this!
R A N T O V E R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ANYONE, even the homeless, in many parts of America, can access e-mail and the web free of charge. Perhaps part of what you are warning of is actually a boon to someone like me who tends toward an unmaterialistic and nomadic lifestyle. I don't NEED an address to matter when I can just go to the local library and communicate.
And someday soon, when laptops are super cheap, super long life batteries or solar power becomes a cost effective commodity, and when satellite wireless communication is the norm, think of the possibilities! Bouncing around will never have been so easy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Bet on wedge shaped robots with a flipper on the upper surface. The flipper will invert the opponent, and can also act as a self-righting mechanism."
Well I saw the opening episode of Battlebots last night and was thouroughly entertained. And there was a little fellow named "Disposable Hero" which was equipped with a flipper just as you described. Unfortunately, the other bot was armed with a giant high RPM spinning disk which made short work of little "Hero." Parts flew off. It was ugly. =)
BTW, in case my point above was not completely clear, I used the landfill analogy to express this:
Nuclear power plants sound like a nice thing to advocate. "They are clean! They are safe!"
But the question you need to ask yourself is:
"would I want one built a block from me? Do _I_ want to live in the shadow of one of these?"
Ask the people who lived near Three Mile Island, or people in most of Eastern Europe and Asia, not to mention Chernobyl itself whether they think Nukes are the solution.
The answer is most likely NO. So rather than deriding the "tree-huggers" let's come up with less potentially risky methods of producing power. Hell, we have had photovoltaic processes for quite a while now, why aren't we concentrating on making them more and more efficient? Something with little or no cost to the world we live in?
yeah sure. Nuclear power plants are really safe. You are probably one of those hypocrytes that calls environmentally concerned people "tree-huggers", laughs at the "greenie-weenies" and then becomes complete incensed when a huge new landfill in your neighborhood is proposed. Care about our environment now, while we still have one.
Fucking get a job starving musician. Since when does playing music give you the right to have a upper-class lifestyle? Make music for the sake of music, not your fucking wallet. Hey, sure if you can get people to PAY you to play for them, great! But I don't think that you have a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to expect people to compensate you. You say something in public you don't go around expecting everybody who heard it to pay you if they repeat or record it. Music is expression not product.
I don't use Napster. I also don't think it is useful to pretend that "napster helps the struggling artists" much the same way that I don't see the use in those "medical marijuana" campaigns. Sure there are a percentage that believe that MJ relieves pain that other drugs cannot for some people. But if you want to smoke MJ and you don't think you should go to jail for it, then fucking change the law and be EXPLICIT about it. You do have the right to do what you will with your own mind. And be honest about what you think in regards to our rights to enjoy music and other forms of expression.
Father figure and the other songs on that album, as well as the next album were pretty good IMO. I used to have the cd around somewhere, think I may have sold it back when I was a starving teenager. This coming from a person who doesn't mind listening to Andy Williams one minute, and The Doors the next. =)
You are Wrong about E containing heroin.
Excerpt from dancesafe.org, a harm reduction non-profit group:
"Rumor #3: Ecstasy pills often contain heroin
False. Thousands of pills have been analysed in laboratories by law enforcement agencies as well as harm reduction programs, and no pill has ever contained heroin. Many other adulterants have been found in ecstasy tablets, like speed, ephedrine, ketamine, and others. But never heroin. This is because heroin is more expensive than MDMA, and it would not be profitable for manufacturers or dealers to put heroin into ecstasy pills."
Well, in my case, my wife who has never read or heard of X-Men, loved the movie. Maybe more than I who used to sit in bookstores and read as many issues as I could.
I would go into my local comic shop and ask them this very question. They most likely will have a few graphic novels of the old stuff available, especially in anticipation of the movie. They can point you in the right direction, Bub.
Im sure this could be explained away by saying that the statue is probably not 100% copper in all of its construction. Supports, etc could be a metal subject to magnetic fields.
I am an X-Men fan since the late 80s, and while I wasn't blown away by the movie, I am impressed with how well it paralleled the comics while trying to entertain the masses. My wife never read any comics but she really liked the movie. Much better than that crock of dookie Me, Myself and Irene (which we snuck into afterward.)
Yeah, you are right! We need at least a couple more zones on this planet where noone can live for a thousand years or more! Cause everyone knows, nukes are safe!! Absolutely no way you can have a leak!!
I'm not talking about censorship or even the 1st amendment per se. I mean that a +1Interesting or +1Insightful comment may come out of the mouth of someone who you already judged to be the villiage idiot. I am deriding all the me-too "Katz sucks" bandwagon riding. Think about it, most people who read Slashdot don't killfilter Katz. (No, I don't have scietntific evidence but I challenge anyone out there to refute this logically. After all if he was as universally hated as your ilk would imply,/. or Andover or someone else would give him a pink slip.) Therefore, many _like_ to read Katz even if he does get a bit full of hyperbole at times. Ya know what? Katz does a service to/. because he provokes discussion.
Don't get me wrong, you certainly have a right to disagree, but don't get any illusions about your view being the majority view. You are merely one of a few vocal fellas. Ease up a bit, take a deep breath, and just take it in and move on if you think it is total crap. Others wish to discuss intelligently, not hear "KATZ YOU SUCK" 15 times.
I do agree with this statement. I know several old-school punks who just went out of control when they were 14 and 15 with drugs (inc. alcohol) and seem to have stunted somewhat their emotional growth. I believe that children, still in their formative years should NEVER be excessive in any chemical daliances. BTW parents this means ritalin and prozac and all that shit too.
No you are wrong. There is a difference between users and _abusers_. I use drugs because they are interesting in their effects and the way I think and percieve the world around me while under their influence. Many abusers try to numb themselves from feeling and that is not a_drug_ problem really. It is a emotional problem.
You too can use drugs with MODERATION(no not crack). I take drugs once a week at most. I am not a violent person. I do not steal. But apparently I am still a criminal. Anything wrong with this picture?
the above AC is, like many ACs, is spouting bullshit. I live in southern California, have had many tokes off of many strangers weed, and I have never (to my knowledge) encountered adulterated weed.
Marijuana in NOT more expensive to produce than heroin or opium. Meth I am not sure of. Keep in mind, opiates are almost universally imported while weed and meth do not need to be.
...that you were ever a heroin addict as you claimed in an earlier post. You make astounding generalizations, but does this mean that you were assaulting people on the street back when you were supposedly an addict?
Addiction is not a good thing. It is not what will be the natural consequence to decriminalization/legalization. Addiction is a health problem. Crime is a result of the control of the drug business by real violent criminals who SHOULD be locked up. This is not the case now. Those who overwhelmingly are jailed are those who possess drugs.
Politicians making the penalties harsher has merely made greater injustice. The "just say no" eighties saw the advent of just what you advocate. There are men and women rotting for LIFE in Federal prison for selling marijuana and other drugs. Many judges abhor these federal guidelines because it takes away the whole point of 'judgement.'
Slashdot Mirror
Nader is against corporations controlling the government and making unsafe products, etc. This does not mean he is for big government as in "oppressive." This means that if a business wants to make money in America, it must abide by the rules and be subject to the will of the people, not the other way around.
I agree with most libertarian values, i.e. personal freedom above all. But unfettered business is destructive. They will lie, cheat, and steal in the pursuit of profit. When an individual breaks the law, he goes to jail or in extreme cases he loses his life! (I disagree with the death penalty because there is no way to guarantee that the convicted is not innocent. Due process and all that, I know, but some people are still murdered by the state. And that is more evil than any DMCA or UCITA don't you think?) A corporation, if the coverup is not complete, might be convicted and may get a large fine. Ouchie. Because a corporation is a profit consuming undying monster, we need a body set up to strictly govern them and make sure they stay in their place. Libertarians seem mostly to be corporate employees, VC's and the like whose "eliminate government!" mantra is really just a self serving wallent expanding point of view.
So I lean more towards Nader, who has a proven track record of protecting the individual, making big business accountable and selflessly serving the public trust. He isn't a lifetime politician, just an intelligent, honest man who has proven his ability to work for YOUR rights over those of BUSINESS. No other candidate has this, hence I will vote for him in November.
Maybe you should too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Most people will die for free for their nation or their god. No one will die for Sony for any amount of money."
this maxim of yours is not true. What is a bodyguard? A mercenary? Even rent-a-cops and 7-11 workers have a signicant risk of death in their jobs. How does reality fit in with your maxim? You don't think it is just a hop skip and jump to private corporate armies? Mark my words friend.
You can label me as a anti-corporate hysterian but the truth is, a corporation is an undying ravenous creature which exists for only ONE purpose: to amass wealth and power and market share. It does not care about the health and well-being of its employees or customers except in context of possible threat to its money diet. Don't ever forget this: corporations are not needed for anything. We should not base laws (IP or otherwise) on what the corporations say they need. Our nation is not dependent on them for our well-being. We as quasi-free individuals in America should realize this!
R A N T O V E R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ANYONE, even the homeless, in many parts of America, can access e-mail and the web free of charge. Perhaps part of what you are warning of is actually a boon to someone like me who tends toward an unmaterialistic and nomadic lifestyle. I don't NEED an address to matter when I can just go to the local library and communicate.
~
And someday soon, when laptops are super cheap, super long life batteries or solar power becomes a cost effective commodity, and when satellite wireless communication is the norm, think of the possibilities! Bouncing around will never have been so easy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Bet on wedge shaped robots with a flipper on the upper surface. The flipper will invert the opponent, and can also act as a self-righting mechanism."
Well I saw the opening episode of Battlebots last night and was thouroughly entertained. And there was a little fellow named "Disposable Hero" which was equipped with a flipper just as you described. Unfortunately, the other bot was armed with a giant high RPM spinning disk which made short work of little "Hero." Parts flew off. It was ugly. =)
BTW, in case my point above was not completely clear, I used the landfill analogy to express this:
Nuclear power plants sound like a nice thing to advocate. "They are clean! They are safe!"
But the question you need to ask yourself is:
"would I want one built a block from me? Do _I_ want to live in the shadow of one of these?"
Ask the people who lived near Three Mile Island, or people in most of Eastern Europe and Asia, not to mention Chernobyl itself whether they think Nukes are the solution.
The answer is most likely NO. So rather than deriding the "tree-huggers" let's come up with less potentially risky methods of producing power. Hell, we have had photovoltaic processes for quite a while now, why aren't we concentrating on making them more and more efficient? Something with little or no cost to the world we live in?
yeah sure. Nuclear power plants are really safe. You are probably one of those hypocrytes that calls environmentally concerned people "tree-huggers", laughs at the "greenie-weenies" and then becomes complete incensed when a huge new landfill in your neighborhood is proposed. Care about our environment now, while we still have one.
"Feed the starving musicians... "
well my response is:
Fucking get a job starving musician. Since when does playing music give you the right to have a upper-class lifestyle? Make music for the sake of music, not your fucking wallet. Hey, sure if you can get people to PAY you to play for them, great! But I don't think that you have a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to expect people to compensate you. You say something in public you don't go around expecting everybody who heard it to pay you if they repeat or record it. Music is expression not product.
I don't use Napster. I also don't think it is useful to pretend that "napster helps the struggling artists" much the same way that I don't see the use in those "medical marijuana" campaigns. Sure there are a percentage that believe that MJ relieves pain that other drugs cannot for some people. But if you want to smoke MJ and you don't think you should go to jail for it, then fucking change the law and be EXPLICIT about it. You do have the right to do what you will with your own mind. And be honest about what you think in regards to our rights to enjoy music and other forms of expression.
Oops, I mean "intellectual property."
Father figure and the other songs on that album, as well as the next album were pretty good IMO. I used to have the cd around somewhere, think I may have sold it back when I was a starving teenager. This coming from a person who doesn't mind listening to Andy Williams one minute, and The Doors the next. =)
You are Wrong about E containing heroin.
Excerpt from dancesafe.org, a harm reduction non-profit group:
"Rumor #3: Ecstasy pills often contain heroin
False. Thousands of pills have been analysed in laboratories by law enforcement agencies as well as harm reduction programs, and no pill has ever contained heroin. Many other adulterants have been found in ecstasy tablets, like speed, ephedrine, ketamine, and others. But never heroin. This is because heroin is more expensive than MDMA, and it would not be profitable for manufacturers or dealers to put heroin into ecstasy pills."
check out the pictures from the X-Men movie....
i found some of the captions to be pretty hilarious
Hilarious movie pictures and captions at stanlee.net
Woah. check out Stan Lees 2.0's wierdo Flash rant column
Weird stuff. Entertaining though
Well, in my case, my wife who has never read or heard of X-Men, loved the movie. Maybe more than I who used to sit in bookstores and read as many issues as I could.
I would go into my local comic shop and ask them this very question. They most likely will have a few graphic novels of the old stuff available, especially in anticipation of the movie. They can point you in the right direction, Bub.
=)
Im sure this could be explained away by saying that the statue is probably not 100% copper in all of its construction. Supports, etc could be a metal subject to magnetic fields.
I think of him more as a repressed "in the closet" kind of gayness. Heh. You know: very straight-laced guy, good-looks, and he even has "his girl."
I am an X-Men fan since the late 80s, and while I wasn't blown away by the movie, I am impressed with how well it paralleled the comics while trying to entertain the masses. My wife never read any comics but she really liked the movie. Much better than that crock of dookie Me, Myself and Irene (which we snuck into afterward.)
"For while he was one of the X-Men's greatest enemies, he also LED the X-Men during one of Professor X's 'trips'"
Wow, I thought Prof. X's school was near the eastern seaboard not Berkeley.
=)
I doubt it was purely a limitation of the car, it may have just been a stoned hippie programmer or something. After all you were near SF after all.
=)
Yeah, you are right! We need at least a couple more zones on this planet where noone can live for a thousand years or more! Cause everyone knows, nukes are safe!! Absolutely no way you can have a leak!!
I'm not talking about censorship or even the 1st amendment per se. I mean that a +1Interesting or +1Insightful comment may come out of the mouth of someone who you already judged to be the villiage idiot. I am deriding all the me-too "Katz sucks" bandwagon riding. Think about it, most people who read Slashdot don't killfilter Katz. (No, I don't have scietntific evidence but I challenge anyone out there to refute this logically. After all if he was as universally hated as your ilk would imply, /. or Andover or someone else would give him a pink slip.) Therefore, many _like_ to read Katz even if he does get a bit full of hyperbole at times. Ya know what? Katz does a service to /. because he provokes discussion.
Don't get me wrong, you certainly have a right to disagree, but don't get any illusions about your view being the majority view. You are merely one of a few vocal fellas. Ease up a bit, take a deep breath, and just take it in and move on if you think it is total crap. Others wish to discuss intelligently, not hear "KATZ YOU SUCK" 15 times.
I do agree with this statement. I know several old-school punks who just went out of control when they were 14 and 15 with drugs (inc. alcohol) and seem to have stunted somewhat their emotional growth. I believe that children, still in their formative years should NEVER be excessive in any chemical daliances. BTW parents this means ritalin and prozac and all that shit too.
No you are wrong. There is a difference between users and _abusers_. I use drugs because they are interesting in their effects and the way I think and percieve the world around me while under their influence. Many abusers try to numb themselves from feeling and that is not a_drug_ problem really. It is a emotional problem.
You too can use drugs with MODERATION(no not crack). I take drugs once a week at most. I am not a violent person. I do not steal. But apparently I am still a criminal. Anything wrong with this picture?
the above AC is, like many ACs, is spouting bullshit. I live in southern California, have had many tokes off of many strangers weed, and I have never (to my knowledge) encountered adulterated weed.
Marijuana in NOT more expensive to produce than heroin or opium. Meth I am not sure of. Keep in mind, opiates are almost universally imported while weed and meth do not need to be.
...that you were ever a heroin addict as you claimed in an earlier post. You make astounding generalizations, but does this mean that you were assaulting people on the street back when you were supposedly an addict?
Addiction is not a good thing. It is not what will be the natural consequence to decriminalization/legalization. Addiction is a health problem. Crime is a result of the control of the drug business by real violent criminals who SHOULD be locked up. This is not the case now. Those who overwhelmingly are jailed are those who possess drugs.
penguinboy, just an FYI....
Politicians making the penalties harsher has merely made greater injustice. The "just say no" eighties saw the advent of just what you advocate. There are men and women rotting for LIFE in Federal prison for selling marijuana and other drugs. Many judges abhor these federal guidelines because it takes away the whole point of 'judgement.'