50 is a little high. The new installer's minimum is 10 hits of the enter key and one tab key (to select yes I want to format my drive)
Now if you want more controll over your install you can select non-default settings and probably get 100 or more. I don't think you could ever do 1 install and get all 212 screens because if you use dhcp then you don't get the network setup promts but if you don't use dhcp then you are never promted for it.
except that not all men made/fight/defend the DMCA (or similar laws) net even most or half or even a mesurable percentage. yet I would wager a bet that a very sizeable percentage of lawyers make/fight/defend these kinds of laws in a perpetuated circle of growther rather than reduction.
the "shall have the right to protect your rights" should be the first and foremost right. All others would fall under it ( probably starting with not being killed, raped, molested, enslaved, etc then moving to more phisical things such as property rights not trespassed agains, stolen from, vandalised, etc )
This disscussion is getting a little old but hopefully some people are still following it.
What you say about choice between windows or mac or linux or whatever is actually what the founding fathers had designed into the constitiution but it has been moved out. They feared a large central federal government and the states were suppose to have most of the power. This way if you wanted to have a gay marage you move to a state that allows that. The federal goverment has taken that choice away with its succession of power grabs away from the states.
Thou shall have the right to protect your rights with equal retaliation.
I favor the negitive rights where possible.
rather than thou shalt not tresspass thou has the right not to be tresspassed against. thou has the right not to be deprived of property. thou has the right not to have speach sensored.
My first post about lawyers was a little more tung in check quick reaction. I have thought more along the lines of your brain storm.
I think all laws should have reconsideration in them starting at 1 year and doubling so reconsideration after 1 year, 2 years, 4 years, 8 years, etc...
I also think that laws should be limited in wording. 250-500 words. Depending on type. This I know requires much more thinking but hopefully you get the idea, as a way to limit scope, what line item veto was suppose to do but failed miserably, I'm sure this would too.
Added to your first and second points I think 70-75% is a good number to pass a law. reconsideration could be a 1/2 or 2/3 majority.
I like the idea of guidelines as legal precidence but not sure how they should be in place. perhaps with the same sunset reconsideration as any other law.
Unfortunately for any of this to take place the complete system needs to be overhauled. Don't think that is going to happen in my lifetime. Especially with the current trend on gun laws.
That has got to be the worst analogy ever. Taking a field like computer science where complexity is inherit in the understanding the facts surrounding it, and comparing it to a political science that is based in opinion. That is like saying lets vote on weather 2+2=4? rather than vote on if cash handout welfare perpetuates the poor or helps them.
Government Lobbing is the biggest problem. I am against all lobbing weather it is for or against my ideals. 99.9% of lobbed laws serve a special interest and put a law into the books that more than likely doesn't need to be there, complicates the law, adds more restrictions on rights, and adds power to the federal government. We rarely ever need new legislation, but always need more education.
A Federal government Politicians job should be very easy. It should consist of educating the public. Reviewing issues but very rarely passing or pushing laws. That is what state government is for.
I think you have it backwards Social and economic interactions have become so complex because the law has become so complex. At the very least they are feeding off of each other one becoming more complex making the other become more complex and back again in a self perpetuating system that no self interested lawyer (is there any other kinds/sarcasm) is going to stop.
ps thanks for some refrences for me to brush up on Roman history.
And here you prove my original point. Lawyers make the DMCA, they fight the DMCA and they Defend the DMCA. What incentive do they have to change the system? Maybe if government was reduced in size and power we could eliminate all 3 from the get go.
Re:Headline dissappointed me....
on
Lawyers In Space...
·
· Score: 4, Informative
It would be a dumb idea if it were not for the fact that law has become so complex without good reason what so ever other than the basic reason of being complex. I would agree with some of your sarcasm as I have seen it several times. How many computer consultants perpetuate a problem to make money rather than fix it? How many Doctors prescribe drugs because of their kickbacks and not because of a real need?
I never said someone who studied law shouldn't be allowed to make it, I said someone who is/was recently a lawyer shouldn't be allowed to go into public office.
but yet someone blasting my property with television signals from outer space can charge me for there "service"????
Sorry your argument doesn't hold up.
Re:Headline dissappointed me....
on
Lawyers In Space...
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It always disappointed me that the Lawyers were the ones that become politicians. Kinda makes for a self perpetuating system of complex laws. What incentive do politicians have to simplify the legal system?
I think it should be a constitutional amendment that Lawyers are not allowed to hold public office. If you pass the bar you have to sign something that says you will never be allowed to run for public office. Or at least have a restriction that you have to give up your certification for 10-20+ years.
Either SECRET ballot, where a vote can't be associated with a person, but the votes can just as easily be thrown out or destroyed and never counted,
or
Every vote is verifiable by a person and it would make votes buy-able.
on small city or state votes I could see how you might be able to buy enough votes. If there was only 1 million votes to begin with and you paid people 20 per vote it would still cost you 10 million to get %50 but on a presidential election where we would be looking at 100+ million votes I don't think enough could be bought. Plus you could use a reward system that the Gub'ment could have vote buyer turn in incentives. Depending on the size of the voting audience they could offer twice what they think would be a going price for the votes. Incentive based policing should be used everywhere but here it would be easy.
Debian now has the 11 hen peck install. If expect US locale and keyboar and have dhcp for your network you can install debian in 11 presses of the enter key + one tab or arrow to select yes to format drive.
Slashdot Mirror
50 is a little high. The new installer's minimum is 10 hits of the enter key and one tab key (to select yes I want to format my drive)
Now if you want more controll over your install you can select non-default settings and probably get 100 or more. I don't think you could ever do 1 install and get all 212 screens because if you use dhcp then you don't get the network setup promts but if you don't use dhcp then you are never promted for it.
except that not all men made/fight/defend the DMCA (or similar laws) net even most or half or even a mesurable percentage. yet I would wager a bet that a very sizeable percentage of lawyers make/fight/defend these kinds of laws in a perpetuated circle of growther rather than reduction.
the "shall have the right to protect your rights" should be the first and foremost right. All others would fall under it ( probably starting with not being killed, raped, molested, enslaved, etc then moving to more phisical things such as property rights not trespassed agains, stolen from, vandalised, etc )
The best defense is a good offense.
Democracy, where two wolves and a sheep vote on what's for dinner.
Don't remember where I read that (probably here somehwere) but it's ironicly funny.
This disscussion is getting a little old but hopefully some people are still following it.
What you say about choice between windows or mac or linux or whatever is actually what the founding fathers had designed into the constitiution but it has been moved out. They feared a large central federal government and the states were suppose to have most of the power. This way if you wanted to have a gay marage you move to a state that allows that. The federal goverment has taken that choice away with its succession of power grabs away from the states.
What about in self defence? how about:
Thou shall have the right not to be killed.
and
Thou shall have the right to protect your rights with equal retaliation.
I favor the negitive rights where possible.
rather than
thou shalt not tresspass
thou has the right not to be tresspassed against.
thou has the right not to be deprived of property.
thou has the right not to have speach sensored.
no I am against "lobbing weather", not against "lobbying whether"
I can be my own grammer nazi
Yes more like if 2+2=A where A is any number from 1-100. Now lets try to figure out which number between 1-100 it is more offten.
Is a fetus a baby at conception? 1 or at birth? 100. Well lets put it at the 2nd trimester. 66 so 2+2=66 this time.
hehe just fun.
No I ment the plant that produces tung oil.
hehe.
That's funny I have a Sparc Ultra 60 under my desk that runs Debian Linux just fine, I don't think Windows has ever supported this hardware.
My first post about lawyers was a little more tung in check quick reaction. I have thought more along the lines of your brain storm.
I think all laws should have reconsideration in them starting at 1 year and doubling so reconsideration after 1 year, 2 years, 4 years, 8 years, etc...
I also think that laws should be limited in wording. 250-500 words. Depending on type. This I know requires much more thinking but hopefully you get the idea, as a way to limit scope, what line item veto was suppose to do but failed miserably, I'm sure this would too.
Added to your first and second points I think 70-75% is a good number to pass a law. reconsideration could be a 1/2 or 2/3 majority.
I like the idea of guidelines as legal precidence but not sure how they should be in place. perhaps with the same sunset reconsideration as any other law.
Unfortunately for any of this to take place the complete system needs to be overhauled. Don't think that is going to happen in my lifetime. Especially with the current trend on gun laws.
One word
"Microsoft"
Thank you for proving my point.
That has got to be the worst analogy ever. Taking a field like computer science where complexity is inherit in the understanding the facts surrounding it, and comparing it to a political science that is based in opinion. That is like saying lets vote on weather 2+2=4? rather than vote on if cash handout welfare perpetuates the poor or helps them.
Government Lobbing is the biggest problem. I am against all lobbing weather it is for or against my ideals. 99.9% of lobbed laws serve a special interest and put a law into the books that more than likely doesn't need to be there, complicates the law, adds more restrictions on rights, and adds power to the federal government. We rarely ever need new legislation, but always need more education.
A Federal government Politicians job should be very easy. It should consist of educating the public. Reviewing issues but very rarely passing or pushing laws. That is what state government is for.
I think you have it backwards Social and economic interactions have become so complex because the law has become so complex. At the very least they are feeding off of each other one becoming more complex making the other become more complex and back again in a self perpetuating system that no self interested lawyer (is there any other kinds /sarcasm) is going to stop.
ps thanks for some refrences for me to brush up on Roman history.
And here you prove my original point. Lawyers make the DMCA, they fight the DMCA and they Defend the DMCA. What incentive do they have to change the system? Maybe if government was reduced in size and power we could eliminate all 3 from the get go.
A government of the people by the people.
not
A government over the people by the lawyers.
It would be a dumb idea if it were not for the fact that law has become so complex without good reason what so ever other than the basic reason of being complex. I would agree with some of your sarcasm as I have seen it several times. How many computer consultants perpetuate a problem to make money rather than fix it? How many Doctors prescribe drugs because of their kickbacks and not because of a real need?
I never said someone who studied law shouldn't be allowed to make it, I said someone who is/was recently a lawyer shouldn't be allowed to go into public office.
How can he do that?
I declare myself not liable for any damages caused by me or my property at any time due to any reason.
please accepth this as my formal decleration.
but yet someone blasting my property with television signals from outer space can charge me for there "service"????
Sorry your argument doesn't hold up.
It always disappointed me that the Lawyers were the ones that become politicians. Kinda makes for a self perpetuating system of complex laws. What incentive do politicians have to simplify the legal system?
I think it should be a constitutional amendment that Lawyers are not allowed to hold public office. If you pass the bar you have to sign something that says you will never be allowed to run for public office. Or at least have a restriction that you have to give up your certification for 10-20+ years.
I wonder if the trade off is enough.
Either SECRET ballot, where a vote can't be associated with a person, but the votes can just as easily be thrown out or destroyed and never counted,
or
Every vote is verifiable by a person and it would make votes buy-able.
on small city or state votes I could see how you might be able to buy enough votes. If there was only 1 million votes to begin with and you paid people 20 per vote it would still cost you 10 million to get %50 but on a presidential election where we would be looking at 100+ million votes I don't think enough could be bought. Plus you could use a reward system that the Gub'ment could have vote buyer turn in incentives. Depending on the size of the voting audience they could offer twice what they think would be a going price for the votes. Incentive based policing should be used everywhere but here it would be easy.
Debian now has the 11 hen peck install. If expect US locale and keyboar and have dhcp for your network you can install debian in 11 presses of the enter key + one tab or arrow to select yes to format drive.
Isn't this called a check book? Free to make changes according to your ability, put what ever you want on it. Update it, make changes.