I was under the impression that some websites like ESPN360.com and Disneyconnection.com carged fees. The ISPs that paid the fees (like Verzion) get access and those that don't pay (like Comcast) don't get access.
And I agree with another poster this is restraint of trade. As a free person I should be able to whip-out my credit card and pay the disneyconnection, but I don't even have that option.
>>>Instead, immediately start looking for a new job.
Oh I did. But there's none out there. Literally. So I was basically trapped with nowhere to go. After all, how many jobs are hiring the week before Christmas?
>>>they have to pay you for all overtime.
I know. I earned $9,000 in just two weeks. I knew I was screwed, but I made sure to screw them back and take as many hours as I could squeeze-in before the firing happened. On the day of termination they left me "finish the day out" so I charged 13 hours instead of the usual 8. Fuck the bastards up the ass.
Yes I knew I was being setup for failure. What part of "I said this is an impossible schedule but they didn't want to hear it," did you not comprehend Mr. Anon. Coward? Still I wanted to at least play ball, because I knew I wouldn't be able to find another job under this current economy. And I was right.
>>>Disney is quoted as saying they knew this was coming
And the rest of that, which was muttered under their breath, was: "We've already bribed the appropriate politicians and judges, so we're certain of victory. It's good to be a megarich megacorporation. Money is power to run the government."
Don't you have that backwards? Although the ideal is to let these works become public domain upon the artist's death, the second best choice for holder of the copyrights should be the SON of the creator, not some cold soulless corporation.
But don't worry. I'm sure Marvel and Disney will ultimately win. At the end of the day the artist/singer/inventor and his family almost-always get the shaft, and the corporations almost-always win by bribing the appropriate politicians. Look at what happened to the inventor of FM Radio (bled dry in lawsuit-after-lawsuit by 1930s-era RCA until he eventually died - then they took over FM Radio for themselves).
Ahhh yes, but that's only the first half of the sentence. You need to read the WHOLE sentence. To quote the Author of the Constitution James Madison - "For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity." (Federalist 41)
He further clarifies: "If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions." (James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792)
And finally if you're still confused, just read the Supreme Law for yourself, which makes clear most powers belong to the State governments, not Congress: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The Supreme Court concurs. That's why many laws have been voided. For example see United States v. Butler
Which part of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate content over privately-owned wires? I guess it's the same part that allows them to ban guns in so-called gun-free zones.
Of course that was over turned by the Supreme Court's United States v. Lopez decision which said the power was limited, and did not extend so far from "commerce" as to authorize the regulation of the carrying of handguns. The Court reasoned that if Congress could regulate something so far removed from commerce, then it could regulate anything, and since the Constitution clearly creates Congress as a body with enumerated powers, this could not be so. I would argue Congress also has no authority to regulate the data being carried over privately-owned wires.
The one exception would be in cases of government-granted monopolies (like Comcast Internet, Baltimore Electric, Bell Telephone, et cetera), per Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
You say there's no problem, but what if I want to watch the videos on Disneyconnection.com but my ISP (Comcast) has not paid the access fee. I'm blocked. To me this seems contrary to net neutrality. It should be ME that decides if I want to pay disneyconnection.com (via credit card, check, or whatever) for access to the videos. The decision should not be in the hands of some government-granted monopoly to say "no"
Right now it's just two sites, but if this idea spreads we may wake-up to discover we can't get hulu.com or youtube.com because Comcast ISP decided not to pay for access. It shouldn't be Comcast's decision. It should be OUR decision to pay or not pay.
Sometimes "they" will set you up such that, when failure happens, they blame you not themselves. This happened to me where I was suddenly shifted from my usual task of documentation to a board design. I've done board designs in the past, but usually I had several months to review the project, contact parts suppliers, et cetera. They only gave me 2 weeks to finish the task. I said this is an impossible schedule but they didn't want to hear it. Worse - I didn't have the necessary tools on my machine. Even though my manager immediately submitted the request for OrCad install on my PC, it took them a week to get it done.
So long story made short - I worked 100 hours over two pre-Christmas weekends (instead of shopping for my kids' presents) trying to finish a circuit card schematic, layout, and parts list in just *1* week. When I handed it over 1 day past their desired date, first they bitched at me because it had errors (well of course - that's what happens when you RUSH things) and then they blamed me for not meeting their unrealistic schedule. I didn't even get to defend myself and say, "The management was to blame with an unrealistic schedule." I was simply shown the door.
And no you can't sue. Contract workers don't have rights.
LINK - http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=%22UK+government%22+teen+masturbation - Many cultures consider masturbation to be a mortal sin. The UK Health Services monopoly should not have authority to overrule these beliefs and tell children "masturbation is your right and good" in direct defiance of the parents' wishes. The government is supposed to be the servant of the Parents/the People, not the other way around. WE are the masters, not serfs.
Somebody else wrote:
>>>Probably because governments are supposed to be acting upon the best interests of the people as a whole (assuming they are not corrupted) making them easier to trust. Businesses on the other hand are only interested in achieving maximum profits even at other peoples' downfall/expense >>>
I don't trust any organization that has direct access to my wallet and sucks dollars out like a vacuum. Neither do I trust any organization that has black-suited men that can bust down my door whenever they feel like it (ref: Professor Gates and about 1 million similar cases every year). At least RIAA or Microsoft can't do either of those things.
>>>While what the RIAA curriculum is teaching might be counter to your moral beliefs (i.e. you may believe that all information should be free and copyright laws are an abomination), unless it is factually inaccurate it doesn't matter. >>>
So you have no objection to RIAA or Coca-cola or the Communists or any other group coming into a school and brainwashing your children to ignore what daddy/mommy taught them (and maybe even turn them in, if they spot mommy/daddy with illegally-copied CDs or other warez).
Got it.
It's interesting that people are so casual about giving-up freedom and tying chains around their ankles. Maybe people feel more secure living as Serfs than as liberated individuals.
Except that I did not. You said the Entrepreneur idea was flawed, because it was based on lying. I merely pointed-out the government-run system has the exact same flaw - they lie. So if you want to reject one on the basis of lying, then you must reject the other for the same cause.
Or you can decide, as I have, that you should make your decision on different criteria. Since government has already failed once, pulling the plug on moon landings in 1972, it makes no sense to trust it a second time. ("Fool me twice, shame on me.")
- Tourism (vacation on the moon or mars!) - Mining raw materials. - Services for the tourists/miners like housing, restaurants, and entertainment.
That's the same way we settled desolate areas like Wyoming or Arizona. And before you (or somebody else) say "we shouldn't disturb these heavenly bodies with mining," then I have to respond: If you're going to take that outlook on space exploration then you might as well stay on Earth until the sun explodes and makes humanity go extinct. We either colonize other worlds and make them favorable for habitation, or we stay here and die as a species. That's the choice.
- Tourism. Don't laugh. Many cities/states build their entire economies around tourism (why else would someone go to Wyoming), and I don't see any reason why the Moon or Mars would be any different. It could be very profitable to set-up vacations to these distant worlds, especially if you target Hollywood stars who seem to have plenty of money to throw-away.
- Raw materials. Not just on the moon and mars, but the asteroid belt could be mined as well.
- Services for the tourists and miners, like housing, food, and entertainment.
"Propaganda institutions" is the phrase you're looking for. Many libertarians claim that's why public schools were created - to fill incoming immigrants with pro-american propaganda, but I think those people are nutters. I think public schools started with good intentions (like most government programs), but evolved into nothing more than soapboxes for lobbyists & others with agendas.
>>>When my kid reaches school age can I make sure she doesn't get exposure to this blatant pack of lies.
Well if you elect me as your State Governor, you can "opt out" of the public school and send your kid to a private school instead, which teaches your values. And if you provide a receipt for said school, you'll be exempt from Government School Taxes for that year (since you shouldn't have to pay for something your kid is not using).
>>>I think the RIAA's actions here border on "sick" and "brainwashing" if you ask me. That's like if Coca Cola ran a program at schools informing children that all other brands are "harmful" and will have severe negative consequences if you drink them. >>>
I share the same thoughts about what UK Health Services is doing with telling schoolchildren "masturbation is good", but few seems to agree with me. For some reason if corporations do it, then it's bad, but if governments do it, then everyone thinks it's okay. Odd.
The UK Government's Health Services called. They have no problem with this curriculum, even if what is being taught by RIAA is contrary to what the parents (us) believe. And no this isn't off-topic.
It all comes back to the same principle - we parents have lost control of what our children are being taught, and other organizations are filling in the gap. Our objections don't matter, because we voluntarily gave-up this control and handed-it over to the UKHS and RIAA.
For my old car topping-off can make the difference between 200 miles and 250 miles on the tank. Since I travel lots of long distance trips, that can mean the difference between having 4 or 5 stops at the gas station in a single day. I prefer fewer stops.
>>>So, what do you call it when you take the trouble to chastise someone whose standards exceed your own?
I remind them that in about 100 years they'll just be a rotting corpse in a grave, and maybe they should learn to enjoy what's left of their lives, instead of being an elitist, nitpicking prick that criticizes everything other people do.
Doesn't matter. Even houses where the resident is not present, are still barred entrance to cops. Else cops could just manufacture lies, "We saw a mysterious person," and start entering people's homes while they were at work (and arresting these people for any crimes observed, like pirated CDs or a stash of weed).
"A man's home is his castle," is more than just a saying. It's enshrined in U.S. law - your "castle" is your "country" and shall not be invaded by the government, except via court order from a judge.
>>>Protip: Just show your damn ID and shut the fuck up. The officer will leave. >>>Protip 2: Don't be an ass and scream insults at the officer as he's leaving
"Papiere bitte. Sie sind Schwarze? Arbeit macht frei! Ha, ha, ha." Professor Gates has every reason as a second-class citizen not to trust the police, and yet he still preserves his right to express his opinion. You need to watch this video: No Warrant; No Search. No Warrant; No Search. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLpSY8d3gRc
The West Wing dealt with this very issue, where a Hispanic nominee for the Supreme Court was arrested while DWH (driving while hispanic). No it's not just fiction - it happens often. Police are our employees and we are the boss. Not the other way 'round. We need to remind them of that basic fact.
>>>After a neighbour called and said they saw someone breaking into the home?
The U.S. Supreme Court says a phone call is Not probable cause and Not reason to enter a private home. How many times do I have to repeat this until it sinks into people's brains? Unless the police actually witness the breakin themselves, they MUST go to a judge first to obtain a warrant, prior to entering a private house. You may not like that, but it is the supreme law.
>>>And if the suspect went back into the house to retrieve a gun so he could shoot the cop, you'd probably be dancing in the streets that yet another jack-booted thug was put down, huh? >>>
Taking a page from Jimmy Carter I see. If you can't make a well-reasoned argument, then demonize the liberty-loving protesters. Not cool pal. That was very Kenye West of you.
Slashdot Mirror
I was under the impression that some websites like ESPN360.com and Disneyconnection.com carged fees. The ISPs that paid the fees (like Verzion) get access and those that don't pay (like Comcast) don't get access.
And I agree with another poster this is restraint of trade. As a free person I should be able to whip-out my credit card and pay the disneyconnection, but I don't even have that option.
>>>Instead, immediately start looking for a new job.
Oh I did. But there's none out there. Literally. So I was basically trapped with nowhere to go. After all, how many jobs are hiring the week before Christmas?
>>>they have to pay you for all overtime.
I know. I earned $9,000 in just two weeks. I knew I was screwed, but I made sure to screw them back and take as many hours as I could squeeze-in before the firing happened. On the day of termination they left me "finish the day out" so I charged 13 hours instead of the usual 8. Fuck the bastards up the ass.
Yes I knew I was being setup for failure. What part of "I said this is an impossible schedule but they didn't want to hear it," did you not comprehend Mr. Anon. Coward? Still I wanted to at least play ball, because I knew I wouldn't be able to find another job under this current economy. And I was right.
>>>Disney is quoted as saying they knew this was coming
And the rest of that, which was muttered under their breath, was: "We've already bribed the appropriate politicians and judges, so we're certain of victory. It's good to be a megarich megacorporation. Money is power to run the government."
Don't you have that backwards? Although the ideal is to let these works become public domain upon the artist's death, the second best choice for holder of the copyrights should be the SON of the creator, not some cold soulless corporation.
But don't worry. I'm sure Marvel and Disney will ultimately win. At the end of the day the artist/singer/inventor and his family almost-always get the shaft, and the corporations almost-always win by bribing the appropriate politicians. Look at what happened to the inventor of FM Radio (bled dry in lawsuit-after-lawsuit by 1930s-era RCA until he eventually died - then they took over FM Radio for themselves).
Ahhh yes, but that's only the first half of the sentence. You need to read the WHOLE sentence. To quote the Author of the Constitution James Madison - "For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity." (Federalist 41)
He further clarifies: "If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions." (James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792)
And finally if you're still confused, just read the Supreme Law for yourself, which makes clear most powers belong to the State governments, not Congress: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The Supreme Court concurs. That's why many laws have been voided. For example see United States v. Butler
BTW:
Which part of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate content over privately-owned wires? I guess it's the same part that allows them to ban guns in so-called gun-free zones.
Of course that was over turned by the Supreme Court's United States v. Lopez decision which said the power was limited, and did not extend so far from "commerce" as to authorize the regulation of the carrying of handguns. The Court reasoned that if Congress could regulate something so far removed from commerce, then it could regulate anything, and since the Constitution clearly creates Congress as a body with enumerated powers, this could not be so. I would argue Congress also has no authority to regulate the data being carried over privately-owned wires.
The one exception would be in cases of government-granted monopolies (like Comcast Internet, Baltimore Electric, Bell Telephone, et cetera), per Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
I disagree.
You say there's no problem, but what if I want to watch the videos on Disneyconnection.com but my ISP (Comcast) has not paid the access fee. I'm blocked. To me this seems contrary to net neutrality. It should be ME that decides if I want to pay disneyconnection.com (via credit card, check, or whatever) for access to the videos. The decision should not be in the hands of some government-granted monopoly to say "no"
Right now it's just two sites, but if this idea spreads we may wake-up to discover we can't get hulu.com or youtube.com because Comcast ISP decided not to pay for access. It shouldn't be Comcast's decision. It should be OUR decision to pay or not pay.
You have to be careful though.
Sometimes "they" will set you up such that, when failure happens, they blame you not themselves. This happened to me where I was suddenly shifted from my usual task of documentation to a board design. I've done board designs in the past, but usually I had several months to review the project, contact parts suppliers, et cetera. They only gave me 2 weeks to finish the task. I said this is an impossible schedule but they didn't want to hear it. Worse - I didn't have the necessary tools on my machine. Even though my manager immediately submitted the request for OrCad install on my PC, it took them a week to get it done.
So long story made short - I worked 100 hours over two pre-Christmas weekends (instead of shopping for my kids' presents) trying to finish a circuit card schematic, layout, and parts list in just *1* week. When I handed it over 1 day past their desired date, first they bitched at me because it had errors (well of course - that's what happens when you RUSH things) and then they blamed me for not meeting their unrealistic schedule. I didn't even get to defend myself and say, "The management was to blame with an unrealistic schedule." I was simply shown the door.
And no you can't sue. Contract workers don't have rights.
LINK - http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=%22UK+government%22+teen+masturbation - Many cultures consider masturbation to be a mortal sin. The UK Health Services monopoly should not have authority to overrule these beliefs and tell children "masturbation is your right and good" in direct defiance of the parents' wishes. The government is supposed to be the servant of the Parents/the People, not the other way around. WE are the masters, not serfs.
Somebody else wrote:
>>>Probably because governments are supposed to be acting upon the best interests of the people as a whole (assuming they are not corrupted) making them easier to trust. Businesses on the other hand are only interested in achieving maximum profits even at other peoples' downfall/expense
>>>
I don't trust any organization that has direct access to my wallet and sucks dollars out like a vacuum. Neither do I trust any organization that has black-suited men that can bust down my door whenever they feel like it (ref: Professor Gates and about 1 million similar cases every year). At least RIAA or Microsoft can't do either of those things.
>>>While what the RIAA curriculum is teaching might be counter to your moral beliefs (i.e. you may believe that all information should be free and copyright laws are an abomination), unless it is factually inaccurate it doesn't matter.
>>>
So you have no objection to RIAA or Coca-cola or the Communists or any other group coming into a school and brainwashing your children to ignore what daddy/mommy taught them (and maybe even turn them in, if they spot mommy/daddy with illegally-copied CDs or other warez).
Got it.
It's interesting that people are so casual about giving-up freedom and tying chains around their ankles. Maybe people feel more secure living as Serfs than as liberated individuals.
>>>Good try, shifting the discussion
Except that I did not. You said the Entrepreneur idea was flawed, because it was based on lying. I merely pointed-out the government-run system has the exact same flaw - they lie. So if you want to reject one on the basis of lying, then you must reject the other for the same cause.
Or you can decide, as I have, that you should make your decision on different criteria. Since government has already failed once, pulling the plug on moon landings in 1972, it makes no sense to trust it a second time. ("Fool me twice, shame on me.")
>>>no profit motive
- Tourism (vacation on the moon or mars!)
- Mining raw materials.
- Services for the tourists/miners like housing, restaurants, and entertainment.
That's the same way we settled desolate areas like Wyoming or Arizona. And before you (or somebody else) say "we shouldn't disturb these heavenly bodies with mining," then I have to respond: If you're going to take that outlook on space exploration then you might as well stay on Earth until the sun explodes and makes humanity go extinct. We either colonize other worlds and make them favorable for habitation, or we stay here and die as a species. That's the choice.
- Tourism. Don't laugh. Many cities/states build their entire economies around tourism (why else would someone go to Wyoming), and I don't see any reason why the Moon or Mars would be any different. It could be very profitable to set-up vacations to these distant worlds, especially if you target Hollywood stars who seem to have plenty of money to throw-away.
- Raw materials. Not just on the moon and mars, but the asteroid belt could be mined as well.
- Services for the tourists and miners, like housing, food, and entertainment.
Fair enough. But will any of those skills land me a high-paying office job or, like my TV-watching parents, lead to a deadend factory or store job.
"Propaganda institutions" is the phrase you're looking for. Many libertarians claim that's why public schools were created - to fill incoming immigrants with pro-american propaganda, but I think those people are nutters. I think public schools started with good intentions (like most government programs), but evolved into nothing more than soapboxes for lobbyists & others with agendas.
See my sig for an example.
>>>When my kid reaches school age can I make sure she doesn't get exposure to this blatant pack of lies.
Well if you elect me as your State Governor, you can "opt out" of the public school and send your kid to a private school instead, which teaches your values. And if you provide a receipt for said school, you'll be exempt from Government School Taxes for that year (since you shouldn't have to pay for something your kid is not using).
>>>I think the RIAA's actions here border on "sick" and "brainwashing" if you ask me. That's like if Coca Cola ran a program at schools informing children that all other brands are "harmful" and will have severe negative consequences if you drink them.
>>>
I share the same thoughts about what UK Health Services is doing with telling schoolchildren "masturbation is good", but few seems to agree with me. For some reason if corporations do it, then it's bad, but if governments do it, then everyone thinks it's okay. Odd.
The UK Government's Health Services called. They have no problem with this curriculum, even if what is being taught by RIAA is contrary to what the parents (us) believe. And no this isn't off-topic.
It all comes back to the same principle - we parents have lost control of what our children are being taught, and other organizations are filling in the gap. Our objections don't matter, because we voluntarily gave-up this control and handed-it over to the UKHS and RIAA.
For my old car topping-off can make the difference between 200 miles and 250 miles on the tank. Since I travel lots of long distance trips, that can mean the difference between having 4 or 5 stops at the gas station in a single day. I prefer fewer stops.
>>>So, what do you call it when you take the trouble to chastise someone whose standards exceed your own?
I remind them that in about 100 years they'll just be a rotting corpse in a grave, and maybe they should learn to enjoy what's left of their lives, instead of being an elitist, nitpicking prick that criticizes everything other people do.
Doesn't matter. Even houses where the resident is not present, are still barred entrance to cops. Else cops could just manufacture lies, "We saw a mysterious person," and start entering people's homes while they were at work (and arresting these people for any crimes observed, like pirated CDs or a stash of weed).
"A man's home is his castle," is more than just a saying. It's enshrined in U.S. law - your "castle" is your "country" and shall not be invaded by the government, except via court order from a judge.
>>>Protip: Just show your damn ID and shut the fuck up. The officer will leave.
>>>Protip 2: Don't be an ass and scream insults at the officer as he's leaving
"Papiere bitte. Sie sind Schwarze? Arbeit macht frei! Ha, ha, ha." Professor Gates has every reason as a second-class citizen not to trust the police, and yet he still preserves his right to express his opinion. You need to watch this video: No Warrant; No Search. No Warrant; No Search. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLpSY8d3gRc
The West Wing dealt with this very issue, where a Hispanic nominee for the Supreme Court was arrested while DWH (driving while hispanic). No it's not just fiction - it happens often. Police are our employees and we are the boss. Not the other way 'round. We need to remind them of that basic fact.
>>>After a neighbour called and said they saw someone breaking into the home?
The U.S. Supreme Court says a phone call is Not probable cause and Not reason to enter a private home. How many times do I have to repeat this until it sinks into people's brains? Unless the police actually witness the breakin themselves, they MUST go to a judge first to obtain a warrant, prior to entering a private house. You may not like that, but it is the supreme law.
>>>And if the suspect went back into the house to retrieve a gun so he could shoot the cop, you'd probably be dancing in the streets that yet another jack-booted thug was put down, huh?
>>>
Taking a page from Jimmy Carter I see. If you can't make a well-reasoned argument, then demonize the liberty-loving protesters. Not cool pal. That was very Kenye West of you.