Oooh, hit submit too fast, forgot to disprove your other idiotic contention:
Quote from the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 4: Clause 4: No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. [house.gov] The 16th Amendment changed that to allow for a "graduated" income tax, that is CLEARLY UN-Constitutional.
As you've obviously flunked 3rd grade let me explain it to you; Constitutional amendments are part of the Constitution. THEREFORE THEY CAN'T BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, CAN THEY?
You obviously do NOT know what you're talking about because you give no examples, no evidence, and no intelligent points to discuss and argue in a civil manner. I gave you multiple examples from the IRS dictating their powers, by way of specific cases with dates, names, and time sentenced, and you say the equivalent of "nuh uh!".
How embarassing for you, making a contention that your own source material disproves, then seeing your disproven words quoted again and again. Now why don't you go back and read it again; don't read through it too fast, give yourself a chance to absorb it. Sound out the large words, maybe then you'll understand them.
Ok, this is the last time I'll have to educate you in basic logic.
You are lying. Those were DIRECT QUOTES FROM THE IRS, ON THE IRS.GOV WEBSITE. Not only that, the page title is "Significant Case Summaries: Nonfiler Enforcement". That doesn't say "Signicant Case Summaries: Fraud Enforcement". That page is here. Either you're lying, or you can't read. You want me to print the entire list?
Obviously you're completely illiterate. I went to the EXACT PAGE you linked to. I looked at the examples you gave. I'm not going to waste time listing all of them, so let's look at the first two you cited.
You wrote:
William F. Wadsworth of Ohio failed to file federal income tax for 1995, 1996, and 1997. He was sentenced to a number of things, including "three years probation, with the first six months in home confinement with electronic monitoring".
Oooh, the big scary governments being all oppressive. What you cut out from your quote, however, is this:
The indictment further charges that he willfully attempted to evade his federal income taxes for 1996 and 1997 by engaging in additional affirmative conduct of: (1) cashing business receipt checks and not depositing receipts into bank accounts; (2) paying for business expenses by currency, or by money orders and cashier's checks purchased with currency, or by having customers send payments to business creditors; and (3) paying for personal expenses and assets with currency and with money orders and cashier's checks purchased with currency.
A bit fraudulent, wouldn't you say? Obviously at this point you feel a little foolish, so I'll only do one more to spare you some embarassment.
Your next example:
Karl F. Kleinpaste of Pennsylvaniv was convicted by a jury to 30 months in prison for "willful failure to file income tax returns, income tax evasion, and making false statements in loan or credit applications". [irs.gov]
I don't even need to quote more about that one, it says it right in that part YOU WROTE. Note the words "evasion" and "false". Sounds like it's more than simple nonpayment, eh?
Most of the others have some aspect of fraud involved. Even the one or two that don't don't really give much information, so there's a good chance some evasion was practiced there, otherwise the IRS could just seize assets.
So let's look back at what you wrote:
Not only that, the page title is "Significant Case Summaries: Nonfiler Enforcement". That doesn't say "Signicant Case Summaries: Fraud Enforcement".
Ohhh, I see now. As a slashdotter you make snap judgements based on titles rather than reading the rest.
That page is here. Either you're lying, or you can't read.
As I've already disproved your point (which wasn't hard to do, considering you yourself gave the link to the page yourself--it's there in black and white), we are left with two options; you're either a liar, or a fool. Or both.
I actually checked many of those examples you linked to. Almost without exception they dealt with people who had consciously defrauded the government by hiding assets, etc. I'll state it again, there is a difference between not paying your taxes and filing false information.
If you as an individual just refuse to pay your taxes, the government will institute legal action against you. They will attempt to seize property and bank accounts to get the money. Only as a last ditch effort, when you have broken the law of the land, will they arrest you.
No, you have missed the point. I earn my money, and I own it until I deem it necessary to part with it. The government is taking something by threat of force that I earned, and belongs to me. If I did that, I'd be put in jail.
Well suck it up. You owe it. I know you don't want to owe it. Neither the government, nor I care.
Al Capone was put in prison. Granted, that was 60-70 years ago, but it still happened. Can you find me someone who didn't pay their taxes and didn't go to jail?
The only example you can think of is Al Capone? I think that tells us something. Also please note that they went after Capone for tax evasion because they were unable to try him for murder. Also keep in mind that Capone deliberately falsified his financial documents. There is a big difference between not paying your taxes and committing a felony to hide how much money you make and where it comes from.
Technically, nothing I purchase with MY money is mine either. My computer was made by Dell, so that's not mine. My television was made by Panasonic, so that's not mine. Even my bread was made by D' Italiano, so even that's not mine.
You've completely and utterly missed the point. Your computer, television, and bread are all yours completely, so you can burn, break, or spraypaint them. It is however against the law to render US currency unfit for circulation.
Hence, your declaration that "According to your definition, and your questionable logic, nothing at all is mine, and nothing is yours either." looks rather foolish in retrospect, no?
Try avoiding your taxes sometime. You'll soon find that the government will take everything you own to get their "fair share". They'll probably even throw you in prison for a good long while. Remember Al Capone... "Tax Evasion". I know he wasn't exactly a role model citizen, but the government still put him in prison because they couldn't prove he was breaking any real laws.
A standard libertarian talking point that is provably false. If you don't pay your taxes the government probably won't catch on for a few years. When they do, they'll insist you pay them. If you don't, they'll probably take legal action against you and try to seize your property. "Jail", despite what you libertarians believe, rarely enters the picture.
You believe that's fine because "it's for the common good". I believe that's a bunch of crap because I work for my money, and I want to keep it.
It's not your money. The government prints and regulates it. And if you want to avoid paying taxes? Barter your work for food and shelter.
I remember hearing this little program that someone wrote that played the star trek next generation theme through the PC speaker. I sounded tinny, but other than that it sounded exactly like the full orchestral version.
I have a sneaking suspicion that if sound cards had never been invented programmers would eventually have gotten the PC speakers to sound a lot better (though they'd still bad). Since you could play just about any note, and at any speed, you can do a fair amount with them.
We now close with Iolo's Song from the PC version of Ultima 5:
I can't help when I think of "security" of the push/pull battle that the U.S. Army had with the Manhattan Project personal. The Army, of course, say bogeymen under every rock at Los Alamos, but the scientists soon discovered that to aid in the project, many "security" concerns had to be circumvented...
Not sure if that's the best example, considering there really was a serious breach at Los Alamos, and it changed the history of the cold war...
I seriously don't think Bill Gates cares about money anymore. To him it's all about "winning" the struggle to define the face of computing.
Re:Not for the more experienced reader
on
A Game of Thrones
·
· Score: 1
and he seems to do a lot of things that are completely innovative; but people who've read fantasy beyond Tolkien/Eddings/Jordan/Goodkind
Why did I suddenly start hearing the "One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong" song from Sesame Street when I saw you list those four names?
I didn't say they were. Just mentioning what it reminded me of. "That cloud reminds me of a horsie" doesn't mean I expect the cloud to actually eat hay...
Slashdot has little to do with the defacement. Slashdot is simply reporting this.
Heh, that reminds me of 2600, which would publish things like "You can hack into this store's computer by sneaking into the back stockroom and entering this on the computer.", then insist that they weren't encouraging illegal activity, merely saying what COULD be done.
Sinbad's numerous ocean scenes created a daunting technological task. If animators had created the film's oceans segment by segment (as in the past), it could have added years to the movie's production time. By using Linux, the DreamWorks effects department was able to create a rolling oceanscape rather than compose the ocean frame by frame.
His point was valid. Animators might be moving to linux en masse; that's fine. But to claim that linux itself is able to do things graphically that other OSes can't is just ridiculous. Linux may be cheaper than the alternatives, but let's not pretend that the underlying technology is so much better than say SGI that you can do things graphically on linux that you are unable to do on SGI.
Or are you really claiming that whatever technique they used to render the oceans couldn't be done on anything other than linux?
Slashdot Mirror
It's better to learn the dangers of MMORPG addiction when you're 12 than when you're 20.
Eh, I don't believe so. Better to experience it after you've basically completed development, rather than in your formative years.
Exchange "heroin" for "MMORPG" and it doesn't sound so good.
Oooh, hit submit too fast, forgot to disprove your other idiotic contention:
Quote from the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 4: Clause 4: No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. [house.gov] The 16th Amendment changed that to allow for a "graduated" income tax, that is CLEARLY UN-Constitutional.
As you've obviously flunked 3rd grade let me explain it to you; Constitutional amendments are part of the Constitution. THEREFORE THEY CAN'T BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, CAN THEY?
You obviously do NOT know what you're talking about because you give no examples, no evidence, and no intelligent points to discuss and argue in a civil manner. I gave you multiple examples from the IRS dictating their powers, by way of specific cases with dates, names, and time sentenced, and you say the equivalent of "nuh uh!".
How embarassing for you, making a contention that your own source material disproves, then seeing your disproven words quoted again and again. Now why don't you go back and read it again; don't read through it too fast, give yourself a chance to absorb it. Sound out the large words, maybe then you'll understand them.
Ok, this is the last time I'll have to educate you in basic logic.
You are lying. Those were DIRECT QUOTES FROM THE IRS, ON THE IRS.GOV WEBSITE. Not only that, the page title is "Significant Case Summaries: Nonfiler Enforcement". That doesn't say "Signicant Case Summaries: Fraud Enforcement". That page is here. Either you're lying, or you can't read. You want me to print the entire list?
Obviously you're completely illiterate. I went to the EXACT PAGE you linked to. I looked at the examples you gave. I'm not going to waste time listing all of them, so let's look at the first two you cited.
You wrote:
William F. Wadsworth of Ohio failed to file federal income tax for 1995, 1996, and 1997. He was sentenced to a number of things, including "three years probation, with the first six months in home confinement with electronic monitoring".
Oooh, the big scary governments being all oppressive. What you cut out from your quote, however, is this:
The indictment further charges that he willfully attempted to evade his federal income taxes for 1996 and 1997 by engaging in additional affirmative conduct of: (1) cashing business receipt checks and not depositing receipts into bank accounts; (2) paying for business expenses by currency, or by money orders and cashier's checks purchased with currency, or by having customers send payments to business creditors; and (3) paying for personal expenses and assets with currency and with money orders and cashier's checks purchased with currency.
A bit fraudulent, wouldn't you say? Obviously at this point you feel a little foolish, so I'll only do one more to spare you some embarassment.
Your next example:
Karl F. Kleinpaste of Pennsylvaniv was convicted by a jury to 30 months in prison for "willful failure to file income tax returns, income tax evasion, and making false statements in loan or credit applications". [irs.gov]
I don't even need to quote more about that one, it says it right in that part YOU WROTE. Note the words "evasion" and "false". Sounds like it's more than simple nonpayment, eh?
Most of the others have some aspect of fraud involved. Even the one or two that don't don't really give much information, so there's a good chance some evasion was practiced there, otherwise the IRS could just seize assets.
So let's look back at what you wrote:
Not only that, the page title is "Significant Case Summaries: Nonfiler Enforcement". That doesn't say "Signicant Case Summaries: Fraud Enforcement".
Ohhh, I see now. As a slashdotter you make snap judgements based on titles rather than reading the rest.
That page is here. Either you're lying, or you can't read.
As I've already disproved your point (which wasn't hard to do, considering you yourself gave the link to the page yourself--it's there in black and white), we are left with two options; you're either a liar, or a fool. Or both.
I actually checked many of those examples you linked to. Almost without exception they dealt with people who had consciously defrauded the government by hiding assets, etc. I'll state it again, there is a difference between not paying your taxes and filing false information.
If you as an individual just refuse to pay your taxes, the government will institute legal action against you. They will attempt to seize property and bank accounts to get the money. Only as a last ditch effort, when you have broken the law of the land, will they arrest you.
No, you have missed the point. I earn my money, and I own it until I deem it necessary to part with it. The government is taking something by threat of force that I earned, and belongs to me. If I did that, I'd be put in jail.
Well suck it up. You owe it. I know you don't want to owe it. Neither the government, nor I care.
Al Capone was put in prison. Granted, that was 60-70 years ago, but it still happened. Can you find me someone who didn't pay their taxes and didn't go to jail?
The only example you can think of is Al Capone? I think that tells us something. Also please note that they went after Capone for tax evasion because they were unable to try him for murder. Also keep in mind that Capone deliberately falsified his financial documents. There is a big difference between not paying your taxes and committing a felony to hide how much money you make and where it comes from.
Technically, nothing I purchase with MY money is mine either. My computer was made by Dell, so that's not mine. My television was made by Panasonic, so that's not mine. Even my bread was made by D' Italiano, so even that's not mine.
You've completely and utterly missed the point. Your computer, television, and bread are all yours completely, so you can burn, break, or spraypaint them. It is however against the law to render US currency unfit for circulation.
Hence, your declaration that "According to your definition, and your questionable logic, nothing at all is mine, and nothing is yours either." looks rather foolish in retrospect, no?
Try avoiding your taxes sometime. You'll soon find that the government will take everything you own to get their "fair share". They'll probably even throw you in prison for a good long while. Remember Al Capone... "Tax Evasion". I know he wasn't exactly a role model citizen, but the government still put him in prison because they couldn't prove he was breaking any real laws.
A standard libertarian talking point that is provably false. If you don't pay your taxes the government probably won't catch on for a few years. When they do, they'll insist you pay them. If you don't, they'll probably take legal action against you and try to seize your property. "Jail", despite what you libertarians believe, rarely enters the picture.
You believe that's fine because "it's for the common good". I believe that's a bunch of crap because I work for my money, and I want to keep it.
It's not your money. The government prints and regulates it. And if you want to avoid paying taxes? Barter your work for food and shelter.
Enforcement: How will they actually prosecute (or even find) spammers that violate the law?
They won't.
For a mere £15 [amazon.co.uk] you can watch it on your region-free DVD player. Eat that, MPAA fascists!
Uhh, the MPAA is still getting a cut of that, you know...
Actually, CGA would look better you know...
I meant still in text, just in CGA mode. Which would mean 40 character mode.
The resolution's too high, if he really wanted to impress us he should have done it in 320x200 CGA.
I sounded tinny, but other than that it sounded exactly like the full orchestral version.
That should read "It sounded tinny", not "I sounded tinny". I don't sound tinny. I have a rich and melodious voice.
I remember hearing this little program that someone wrote that played the star trek next generation theme through the PC speaker. I sounded tinny, but other than that it sounded exactly like the full orchestral version.
I have a sneaking suspicion that if sound cards had never been invented programmers would eventually have gotten the PC speakers to sound a lot better (though they'd still bad). Since you could play just about any note, and at any speed, you can do a fair amount with them.
We now close with Iolo's Song from the PC version of Ultima 5:
beep BEEP beep, beep BEEEP beep,
beep BEEP beep BEEP beep beep beep beep,
beep beep beep, beep beep,
beep beep beep beep beep beep.
I can't help when I think of "security" of the push/pull battle that the U.S. Army had with the Manhattan Project personal. The Army, of course, say bogeymen under every rock at Los Alamos, but the scientists soon discovered that to aid in the project, many "security" concerns had to be circumvented...
Not sure if that's the best example, considering there really was a serious breach at Los Alamos, and it changed the history of the cold war...
I've always thought that a creed of Linux was to do more with less.
If that were true, why does Linux take almost as long to boot up now as it did back in 96?
I seriously don't think Bill Gates cares about money anymore. To him it's all about "winning" the struggle to define the face of computing.
and he seems to do a lot of things that are completely innovative; but people who've read fantasy beyond Tolkien/Eddings/Jordan/Goodkind
Why did I suddenly start hearing the "One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong" song from Sesame Street when I saw you list those four names?
Three words that everyone here has seen on way too many little packets:
DO NOT EAT.
I didn't say they were. Just mentioning what it reminded me of. "That cloud reminds me of a horsie" doesn't mean I expect the cloud to actually eat hay...
Slashdot has little to do with the defacement. Slashdot is simply reporting this.
Heh, that reminds me of 2600, which would publish things like "You can hack into this store's computer by sneaking into the back stockroom and entering this on the computer.", then insist that they weren't encouraging illegal activity, merely saying what COULD be done.
That wasn't his point. He was responding to this:
Sinbad's numerous ocean scenes created a daunting technological task. If animators had created the film's oceans segment by segment (as in the past), it could have added years to the movie's production time. By using Linux, the DreamWorks effects department was able to create a rolling oceanscape rather than compose the ocean frame by frame.
His point was valid. Animators might be moving to linux en masse; that's fine. But to claim that linux itself is able to do things graphically that other OSes can't is just ridiculous. Linux may be cheaper than the alternatives, but let's not pretend that the underlying technology is so much better than say SGI that you can do things graphically on linux that you are unable to do on SGI.
Or are you really claiming that whatever technique they used to render the oceans couldn't be done on anything other than linux?
You sure you're willing to take such a courageous, outspoken stance on slashdot?
Proof? Oh wait, you was hoping we wouldn't ask.
Here. Oh, wait, you was [sic] hoping I wouldn't answer.
People have asked the companies to do linux versions. Then the companies take a risk and make the linux versions. Then nobody buys the linux versions.
Supply!=support. Don't most linux driver-releasing hardware companies not support them officially?
A bikini is all about the woman feeling good about herself.
Wo-man? I've heard rumours of such things, but are you seriously stating they actually exist?