I've recently been reflecting on the purpose of the law. I agree, as part of a civil society we choose to give up our freedom to do things that are against 'the law'. Why? Well, to secure Life, Liberty, and Property, according to the founders of this country.
So, why do we have laws imposing a 55mph speed limit? To preserve life, as such speed limits theoretically reduce the number of innocent people transformed into road pizza by some confused drivers who might otherwise confuse small-town roads with the European Autobahn.
So again, back to my original point, and I'll pretend I'm a Californian for a moment. Why should the State Patrol be allowed to use this transponder data to catch speeders? Well, if it can be proven to save lives without an unreasonable cost in tax dollars (and yes, you can put a price tag on a life, just ask any insurance company), then I would be for it. If, on the other hand, it's just to force people into obedience of the law for the law's sake, then it starts to be an abuse of freedom.
The simple act of checking could make it do something else entierly.
To fully realize the problem of this in everyday data storage, imagine your Weird Al MP3s transformed into Brittany Spears or N'Sync whenever you listen to them....
This thought reminds me of an excellent episode of Junkyard Wars I once saw.
The challenge: To build battling R/C cars. No, not the little foot-long cars you race down at the track.
Take a real junked automobile, rip out the driver's seat, hook up some remote-controlled servos to the wheel and the pedals, and for the finishing touch, add some weapons for ramming and slamming. Take 'em out onto a wide stretch of sand and smash 'em against each other for points.
If you put an infinite number of geeks with an infinite number of wearable computers on an infinite number of trains, will you get Hamlet in l33tsp3@k?
My sympathy to those using AT&T for broadband internet. It is a fate that I myself narrowly escaped.
Earlier this month, I found myself moving to a new apartment, and needing new internet access. The cable provider monopolizing my new neighborhood? None other than AT&T.
I called up on the 3rd, ordered service, and was told that the cable guy would be out on a Saturday. That Saturday came and went, and of course, the cable guy never showed up. Seems the first person I had spoken to had failed to put in a work order.
Next appointment: Wednesday afternoon. My roommate takes off early from work so he can meet Cable Guy. Cable Guy arrives 10 minutes before my roommate gets there, leaves a note, and disappears.
So, he calls in to set up another appointment, and is told about installation fees. Fees which I was told, just last weekend, wouldn't apply, since I was ordering the 'basic' (do-it-yourself) modem installation. Here's where the fun begins.
I call them up to get a straight answer on the pricing. I get referred to two 'local' 1-800 service numbers. The first is disconnected. The second is for Long Distance (no, I don't want to buy any, thank you!)
I get referred to other phone numbers. Somehow, I end up getting a local broadband support office... on the other end of the country.
Indeed, until I declare my intentions to cancel my order (after the 8th toll-free phone call, and the 10th time on hold), it seems there is not one person in the entire company who can give me a straight answer on pricing. And by then, I've made up my mind to look into DSL and Dish Network. Both of them such good deals in my area that it's a wonder I ever considered AT&T in the first place.
On a side note, I recently heard on the radio that in a survey of satisfaction with the customer support services of various industries, Cable TV ranked at rock-bottom. And the worst of the worst? Charter, Comcast, and AT&T.
True, the capability for 'happiness' hasn't increased any. Happiness is a highly subjective thing, and different people naturally experience different amounts of it. People tell me that I'm a naturally 'happy' person, that I smile all the time. I know people who frown just as frequently.
On the other hand, I would think it safe to say that technology has increased the overall comfort level of our society. Comfort and Happiness aren't the same (else, I wouldn't find camping even in the most miserable of conditions so enjoyable).
What this increase in comfort level does for us, in theory, is give us more time to spend in the 'pursuit of happiness', to take the phrase from the U.S. Declaration of Independence. The pursuit does not necessarily guarantee the attainment of happiness, as I've mentioned... nor is technological advancement altogether necessary for this pursuit.
I'm sick of technology. I wish it would go away, sometimes. I really do.
I've been reading a very good book recently, The Existential Pleasures of Engineering, by Samuel Florman... and he addresses the growing trend of antitechnology, and refutes many claims associated with this trend. I'd have to quote three full chapters just to sum up his arguements, but I wouldn't hesitate to put it on my list of 'recommended reading'.
The thing is, technology is not likely to 'go away'. To begin with, it's a gross personification to treat technology as a thing with a will of its own. It can seem that way, to be sure... but every unforseen result of technology can be traced to a human-made decision, or series of decisions.
I belive it is an aspect of human nature to experiment, to explore, and to create. In a way, Philosophy, Art, Science, and Engineering are all efforts to fulfill a fundamental human impulse. I am attending school to become an Engineer... but at the same time, I consider myself a part-time Philosopher, Artist, and Scientist.
The 'solution' proposed by most antitechnologists does involve deliberately changing human nature. But such proposals are dangerous. How do we know that we are not 'dehumanizing' ourselves even further?
True indeed. For looking up facts, the internet is great. But when I really want to -think- about something, I'll generally find a really good book. Either from a library, or a bookstore, or perhaps borrowed from a good friend.
If there is such a directly proportional link between learning and internet/computer access... then perhaps someone can explain to me the mystery of IRC Newbies. And even some IRC Not-So-Newbies.;-)
Hear hear. In the words of Ben Franklin, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
I: You don't have the right to our public lands to strip mine, graze your cattle, chop down our trees, or drill out our oil.
I'll buy that. It's highly unlikely that I'll ever be in the mining, cattle, lumber, or oil business, being a computer engineer, but if I ever do end up in these businesses, I'll do it only on land that I own. And since it will be my own, and I give a hoot about my own land values, you can rest assured I'll take damned good care of it.
II: You don't have the right to rile up your dittoheads by blaming all their personal problems on environmentalists (tree-huggers), immigrants (racist term of the month), and feminists ("feminazis").
Fine by me. Though it'd be nice if the environmentalists, racist race warlords (self-appointed "civil rights leaders"), and feminists stopped blaming the troubles of the world on me just cause I happen to be a white male. Hey, I didn't ask to be.
VI: You don't have a right to criminalize victim-less behavior so that you can sell extra helicopters to Columbia, have an excuse to violate the original Fourth Amendment through illegal search and seisures, and basically try and enforce a police state.
I couldn't agree more. Arresting folks for being high in public makes sense to me. Same as throwing folks in the drunk tank if they've had a bit too much and are wandering the streets. Arresting them on the suspicion that they've got a little bit of a plant in their own house, however, is ludicrous.
VII: You don't have a right to the possessions of others. But, if you're a criminal junk bond salesman or inside trader, you'll go to a minimum security prison with a big screen TV and get to live a life of leisure.
I won't disagree, our prison system's messed up. Like the guy in Shawshank Redemption said, "Funny thing is, on the outside, I was an honest man. I had to come to prison to become a crook."
Let's not mix rights. Just 'cause I've got the right to binge on bad foods, as in, no one ought to be able to stop me, doesn't mean it's right, as in, proper or good, to do so. It's risky business, mixing ethics and politics. In philosophy, it's difficult to call any answer right, as in, correct.
I have the right to walk on by a person in suffering. However, I also have a personal code of ethics. According to my code of ethics, it is wrong to exercise this right. This is called responsibility. Rights are enforcable. Responsibility is not.
But according to my ethics, it is also wrong of me to deny another of this right. I can't force other folks to be responsible. I can do my damnest to persuade them, but if they won't be persuaded, it's between them and whatever Higher Authority they may or may not believe in. ---
I couldn't agree more. In the words of Voltaire, "In general the art of government consists in taking as much money as
possible from one class of citizens to give to the other."
This seems about as good a discussion as any to share something I got from a friend lately. It was supposedly written up by a member of my state's legislature. Can't verify the source personally, but I do agree with the sentiment.
Articles for the Constitution
We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great- great-great grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden, delusional and other liberal bedwetters.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people were confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of Non-Rights.
ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc. but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. if you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big-screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You don't have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won't lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you'd like; however, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world, and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.
ARTICLE IX: You don't have the right to a job. All of us sure want all of you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to pursue happiness - which by the way, it is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.BR ---
Slashdot Mirror
Two 'b's, or not two 'b's?
you're not free to break the law...
I've recently been reflecting on the purpose of the law. I agree, as part of a civil society we choose to give up our freedom to do things that are against 'the law'. Why? Well, to secure Life, Liberty, and Property, according to the founders of this country.
So, why do we have laws imposing a 55mph speed limit? To preserve life, as such speed limits theoretically reduce the number of innocent people transformed into road pizza by some confused drivers who might otherwise confuse small-town roads with the European Autobahn.
So again, back to my original point, and I'll pretend I'm a Californian for a moment. Why should the State Patrol be allowed to use this transponder data to catch speeders? Well, if it can be proven to save lives without an unreasonable cost in tax dollars (and yes, you can put a price tag on a life, just ask any insurance company), then I would be for it. If, on the other hand, it's just to force people into obedience of the law for the law's sake, then it starts to be an abuse of freedom.
"The Clinton, Miss.-based company ..."
Say what you like, I'm blaming this all on Clinton.
The simple act of checking could make it do something else entierly.
To fully realize the problem of this in everyday data storage, imagine your Weird Al MP3s transformed into Brittany Spears or N'Sync whenever you listen to them....
This is, by far, more than a mere fax pas....
This thought reminds me of an excellent episode of Junkyard Wars I once saw.
The challenge: To build battling R/C cars. No, not the little foot-long cars you race down at the track.
Take a real junked automobile, rip out the driver's seat, hook up some remote-controlled servos to the wheel and the pedals, and for the finishing touch, add some weapons for ramming and slamming. Take 'em out onto a wide stretch of sand and smash 'em against each other for points.
Man, I love that show....
also abbreviated GNULA
...Written by a team of lawyers on the GNULA Bar? <rimshot>
"Once more (infinitely recurring inside a timeloop) with feeling"
Followed by...
"Let's do the time warp agaaaaaain!"
If you put an infinite number of geeks with an infinite number of wearable computers on an infinite number of trains, will you get Hamlet in l33tsp3@k?
Actually, it was meant to be a joke. I've got a job. I just wish it were a job at Google!
Can I have a job?
Liberty! Equality! Fraternity!
Does this mean there'll be free beer?
Question 1 : Are hydrinos possible according to the Schrodinger equation?
Yes and no.
My sympathy to those using AT&T for broadband internet. It is a fate that I myself narrowly escaped.
Earlier this month, I found myself moving to a new apartment, and needing new internet access. The cable provider monopolizing my new neighborhood? None other than AT&T.
I called up on the 3rd, ordered service, and was told that the cable guy would be out on a Saturday. That Saturday came and went, and of course, the cable guy never showed up. Seems the first person I had spoken to had failed to put in a work order.
Next appointment: Wednesday afternoon. My roommate takes off early from work so he can meet Cable Guy. Cable Guy arrives 10 minutes before my roommate gets there, leaves a note, and disappears.
So, he calls in to set up another appointment, and is told about installation fees. Fees which I was told, just last weekend, wouldn't apply, since I was ordering the 'basic' (do-it-yourself) modem installation. Here's where the fun begins.
I call them up to get a straight answer on the pricing. I get referred to two 'local' 1-800 service numbers. The first is disconnected. The second is for Long Distance (no, I don't want to buy any, thank you!)
I get referred to other phone numbers. Somehow, I end up getting a local broadband support office... on the other end of the country.
Indeed, until I declare my intentions to cancel my order (after the 8th toll-free phone call, and the 10th time on hold), it seems there is not one person in the entire company who can give me a straight answer on pricing. And by then, I've made up my mind to look into DSL and Dish Network. Both of them such good deals in my area that it's a wonder I ever considered AT&T in the first place.
On a side note, I recently heard on the radio that in a survey of satisfaction with the customer support services of various industries, Cable TV ranked at rock-bottom. And the worst of the worst? Charter, Comcast, and AT&T.
Gee, I wonder why.
Be on the frontline for war reporting.
Just what we need. Geraldo transmitted around the world in 3D!
On that thought, though, there are a number of TV shows I'd fear to see in an immersive environment. Jerry Springer comes immediately to mind....
True, the capability for 'happiness' hasn't increased any. Happiness is a highly subjective thing, and different people naturally experience different amounts of it. People tell me that I'm a naturally 'happy' person, that I smile all the time. I know people who frown just as frequently.
On the other hand, I would think it safe to say that technology has increased the overall comfort level of our society. Comfort and Happiness aren't the same (else, I wouldn't find camping even in the most miserable of conditions so enjoyable).
What this increase in comfort level does for us, in theory, is give us more time to spend in the 'pursuit of happiness', to take the phrase from the U.S. Declaration of Independence. The pursuit does not necessarily guarantee the attainment of happiness, as I've mentioned... nor is technological advancement altogether necessary for this pursuit.
---
I'm sick of technology. I wish it would go away, sometimes. I really do.
I've been reading a very good book recently, The Existential Pleasures of Engineering, by Samuel Florman... and he addresses the growing trend of antitechnology, and refutes many claims associated with this trend. I'd have to quote three full chapters just to sum up his arguements, but I wouldn't hesitate to put it on my list of 'recommended reading'.
The thing is, technology is not likely to 'go away'. To begin with, it's a gross personification to treat technology as a thing with a will of its own. It can seem that way, to be sure... but every unforseen result of technology can be traced to a human-made decision, or series of decisions.
I belive it is an aspect of human nature to experiment, to explore, and to create. In a way, Philosophy, Art, Science, and Engineering are all efforts to fulfill a fundamental human impulse. I am attending school to become an Engineer... but at the same time, I consider myself a part-time Philosopher, Artist, and Scientist.
The 'solution' proposed by most antitechnologists does involve deliberately changing human nature. But such proposals are dangerous. How do we know that we are not 'dehumanizing' ourselves even further?
---
True indeed. For looking up facts, the internet is great. But when I really want to -think- about something, I'll generally find a really good book. Either from a library, or a bookstore, or perhaps borrowed from a good friend.
;-)
If there is such a directly proportional link between learning and internet/computer access... then perhaps someone can explain to me the mystery of IRC Newbies. And even some IRC Not-So-Newbies.
---
Actually the Internet Oracle recently predicted this kind of practice becoming commonplace....
---
You know what this means.
It is now possible to say that everyone has performed the miraculous feat of Faster-Than-Light travel!
---
I just hate it when my car goes critical, and there ain't a service station for miles around....
---
Hear hear. In the words of Ben Franklin, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
---
I: You don't have the right to our public lands to strip mine, graze your cattle, chop down our trees, or drill out our oil.
I'll buy that. It's highly unlikely that I'll ever be in the mining, cattle, lumber, or oil business, being a computer engineer, but if I ever do end up in these businesses, I'll do it only on land that I own. And since it will be my own, and I give a hoot about my own land values, you can rest assured I'll take damned good care of it.
II: You don't have the right to rile up your dittoheads by blaming all their personal problems on environmentalists (tree-huggers), immigrants (racist term of the month), and feminists ("feminazis").
Fine by me. Though it'd be nice if the environmentalists, racist race warlords (self-appointed "civil rights leaders"), and feminists stopped blaming the troubles of the world on me just cause I happen to be a white male. Hey, I didn't ask to be.
VI: You don't have a right to criminalize victim-less behavior so that you can sell extra helicopters to Columbia, have an excuse to violate the original Fourth Amendment through illegal search and seisures, and basically try and enforce a police state.
I couldn't agree more. Arresting folks for being high in public makes sense to me. Same as throwing folks in the drunk tank if they've had a bit too much and are wandering the streets. Arresting them on the suspicion that they've got a little bit of a plant in their own house, however, is ludicrous.
VII: You don't have a right to the possessions of others. But, if you're a criminal junk bond salesman or inside trader, you'll go to a minimum security prison with a big screen TV and get to live a life of leisure.
I won't disagree, our prison system's messed up. Like the guy in Shawshank Redemption said, "Funny thing is, on the outside, I was an honest man. I had to come to prison to become a crook."
X: Agreed.
Thank you.
---
Let's not mix rights. Just 'cause I've got the right to binge on bad foods, as in, no one ought to be able to stop me, doesn't mean it's right, as in, proper or good, to do so. It's risky business, mixing ethics and politics. In philosophy, it's difficult to call any answer right, as in, correct.
I have the right to walk on by a person in suffering. However, I also have a personal code of ethics. According to my code of ethics, it is wrong to exercise this right. This is called responsibility. Rights are enforcable. Responsibility is not.
But according to my ethics, it is also wrong of me to deny another of this right. I can't force other folks to be responsible. I can do my damnest to persuade them, but if they won't be persuaded, it's between them and whatever Higher Authority they may or may not believe in.
---
I couldn't agree more. In the words of Voltaire, "In general the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to the other."
This seems about as good a discussion as any to share something I got from a friend lately. It was supposedly written up by a member of my state's legislature. Can't verify the source personally, but I do agree with the sentiment.
Articles for the Constitution
We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great- great-great grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden, delusional and other liberal bedwetters.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people were confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of Non-Rights.
ARTICLE I:
You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II:
You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc. but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III:
You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV:
You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.
ARTICLE V:
You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI:
You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII:
You do not have the right to the possessions of others. if you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big-screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII:
You don't have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won't lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you'd like; however, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world, and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.
ARTICLE IX:
You don't have the right to a job. All of us sure want all of you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE X:
You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to pursue happiness - which by the way, it is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.BR
---