I'm not even a climatologist, scientist, or even a meteorologist, but I seem to understand something that most people don't seem to: The weather where you're standing is just a small part of the overall system of weather that spans the entire planet. The implication of global warming means that there is more total energy in that global system of weather, which causes it's overall behaviour to change.
Congratulations, you're probably a victim of identity theft, and you don't even know it yet!
Why, in 2014, are you casually using your real name anywhere online that you aren't forced to? You should be using a pseudonym or going entirely anonymous as much as possible.
I thought they had been doing experiments with quantum entanglement that had possible implications for communications. No, not FTL communications. I was thinking communications over long distances that wouldn't have many of the drawbacks of using radio. Oh well.. But I'm pretty sure NASA has been working on using laser communications between the Earth and the Moon, haven't they?
You mean utilize quantum entanglement? Maybe by the time someone is actually ready to go to Mars, they'll have developed the idea far enough to actually do it. Until then: Lasers.
You're being funny, but the irony here is that someone out there is thinking precisely that.
So far as I'm concerned this comes under the general heading of "Technology we do not need". The First World is rapidly becoming a Technological Babylon.
That's an unnecessarily sensationalist headline if I ever saw one. Slashdot editors get modded down to "-1, Troll" for that so far as I'm concerned. Some random court making a ruling concerning one single website does not a huge controversy make.
All I'm saying is that it (child pornography) should be decriminalised.
*sigh* This is your blind-spot: You cannot say this to people without appearing to be a pedophile. It doesn't matter why you are saying it or what your motivation is for saying it or what your "big picture" is, all people hear is "I think dirty pictures of children shouldn't be illegal". This includes law enforcement, by the way. If you say this thing in real life in front of other people, they will asssume you are a pedophile and you will be attacked as a pedophile. If you say it in front of law enforcement, they will assume you are a pedophile and you can then anticipate being investigated as a pedophile. You may as well say "I think the President of the United States should be killed", or "I'm glad the World Trade Center was destroyed by terrorists" or "Some women who are rape victims were asking for it"; no one will care WHY you're saying it, all they'll care about is that what you're saying is utterly wrong and totally offensive. There is "exercising your right to freedom of speech" and then there is "being an idiot and/or being an asshole", and in this case you are being the latter. Are you really so naive that you don't understand this, or is there just something wrong with your brain that doesn't allow you to understand this? Regardless of what may or may not be wrong with you, what you are saying here is completely and utterly wrong and there is no way you can justify it. You can continue to assert that "most people are idiots" all you want, it doesn't change something that the vast majority of adults alive today accept as "right", and that what you are saying is terribly wrong.
Listen, idiot, I'm going to say this one more time in as few words as possible, since you're either ignoring it or incapable of understanding. Please read every single word: You cannot tell people "I think posession of child pornography should not be illegal" without people assuming (probably correctly!) that you are a pedophile. Furthermore: There is NO VALID REASON to be in posession of child pornography in the first place, unless you are indeed a pedophile. I don't care what the police do, and I don't care if planting CP on people happens. People get framed for all sorts of crimes every single day and there is nothing you can do to stop that, not any more than you can stop people from speeding or running a stop sign when nobody's looking. However we have laws like this against the production and posession of CP for damn good reasons, and when you start making exceptions to the laws, you create loopholes actual criminals use to escape them. You don't like it, then tough shit, go sign up to be one of the first Mars colonists, then you can leave Earth with your likely sizable CP collection and be free of Earthly laws -- except when the other colonists discover your proclivities, they'll likely put you out the airlock.
Oh, and go ahead and call me names all you want, asshole, all you've done in this entire conversation is demonstrate that you're probably a child molestor or at least some sick piece of crap who masturbates to child pornography.
That's a basic tenet of running a business as it was explained to me. I'm sure the idea of people getting paid (even if it's micro-payments) for the use of the content they generate (basically, a royalty) would appeal to everyone, but I'm sure that if this became the law of the land somehow, website owners and companies would respond in two different ways:
1) "Social networking" sites like Facebook would cease to be free to use 2) Websites and companies would be constantly trying to short-change their users on micropayments, or at least low-ball them to keep profits up.
Additionally, this would more or less kill any possibility of anonymity on social networking sites or any other site that pays royalties for use of user-generated content, because they'd need legal names in order to make payments in a legal manner. It all seems like a nice idea on the surface, but once you start thinking it through you'd start to realize that this idea would completely destroy the Internet as we know it.
Oh, I see. So you're caught with CP, they remove and destroy it, but they don't arrest and interrogate you, investiage you on possibly being a pedophile? How convenient if you are a pedophile. Here's a clue for you: If you obtain child pornography through any means then you are a pedophile. Pedophiles eventually will evolve to actually molesting children because they are mentally ill and cannot help themselves, it's just a matter of time before a child is victimized by them. Furthermore, as I said earlier: If you advocate posession of CP not being a prosecutable offense then you are going to be accused by the vast majority of society of being a pedophile regardless of whether you are or not -- and that's a stain that will never wash off you. Therefore: You are either horribly naive, incredibly dumb, a pedophile, or just another troll stirring up shit. Which are you? Since you keep pushing the whole "de-criminalizing CP posession" agenda, my opinion is veering rapidly towards "pedophile in denial about who he is, trying to justify his stash of CP being 'OK' to have".
Go turn yourself in before you molest a child -- assuming you already haven't. And don't complain that I'm labelling you a pedophile, because I'm not, that's all on you, you've practically gone out of your way to label yourself as such in a public discussion forum.
You must be a troll, or you're just plain dumb. Your comment was read by me repeatedly, and as you will notice the relevant sections were quoted to prevent any misunderstandings, and you're ignoring what I said. If you said in public what you said there you'd have people jump all over you thinking you're a pedophile because any reasonable and sane person would not wish to advocate posession of child pornography being made legal, and I just can't see how you could be that dumb and yet be able to put together coherent (if rediculous) sentences, so you must be just another shitty troll. So far as calling me "reactionary" that's at least as rediculous as everything else you're insisting upon here so once again I must conclude you are just another shitty troll looking to get your jollies on the Internet. Don't bother replying to this as I believe I'm done wasting my time on just another troll.
Can you clarify what you mean by "not allowed to exist"?
Pornographic images of children victimizes children because children are incapable of giving Informed Consent due to their developmental level; the vast majority of people agree with this, as do I. The act of producing child pornography is illegal, the product itself, or posessing the product itself, are all illegal; the vast majority of people also agree with this, as do I. As such child pornographic materials need to be destroyed or at least removed permanently from circulation; the vast majority of people agree with this, as do I. If you don't for some reason then perhaps you need to re-examine yourself and your motivations. This is not the classical discussion of "What is art and what is pornography", because children, who cannot give Informed Consent are involved, not adults, who can.
In fact I'd suggest that decriminalising possession might be worth considering.
Are you a child molestor? Statements like that would lead most people to believe that you are.
I think you need to differentiate between "censorship" and "illegal content". I am not in any way, shape or form going to say that, for instance, child pornography should be allowed to exist, as the people who create and traffic in such material are predators, plain and simple, and need to be dealt with as the criminals they are. However the hue and cry to 'Protect the children!' is usually disingenuous at best, used merely as an emotional ploy to further someone's agenda.
On the other hand you may well be one of those people who truly believe that you know better what's best for all other people and for society in general, and thus your sense of moral superiority in turn makes you believe that anything you do is right and justified, regardless of the rights of others you are trampling on. If you're That Guy, then you are the one who needs to be censored, not the Internet.
"Internet censorship, in any way, shape, or form, is wrong, and I for one do not support it nor will I endure it, because while ostensibly it is to 'protect the children!', it is inevitably mis-used as a tool by politicians to further their own political and social agendas, and by proxy it is further mis-used by big business to increase their profits by silencing their competition. Lastly it has been proven time and time again that using blacklists to censor the internet simply does not work, and it inevitably will block perfectly 'acceptable' content while sometimes allowing 'unacceptable' content through. Therefore I do not wish to have anything to do with anything having to do with any form of censorship, please do not include me in it, and please do not bother me about this subject again."
This. I see anyone who even got involved with Bitcoin to be an idiot in the first place because I still believe in the end it's going to get squashed by governments and declared null, void, and illegal. All these copycats? They just exist to troll the idiots who feel like they "lost out" on Buttcoin in the first place. It may as well be Pogs or Beanie Babies or Pokemon, it's just useless collectible nonsense. The only "winners" in this case are companies like AMD and Nvidia who are selling more GPUs to idiots who are "mining" this stuff.
It's about forcing employers to pay for contraception for others.
The core of your argument here is:
Second, you do realize that atheism is itself a faith, right? That you are essentially replacing the Church with the State, right?
How so? If all Catholic-run businesses were staffed by so-called "Good Catholics" then this shouldn't even be an issue because none of the affected women would even dream of purchasing any form of contraception, right?
Let me ask you this: What about the women of child-bearing years who are working for Catholic-run businesses/organizations, but aren't Catholic? Is it OK for them to be discriminated against in this way, and be forced to pay full price for contraceptives, just because of who they work for? Do you expect them to go work somewhere else instead? Isn't this a Church enforcing it's Will on someone not associated with their religion via the muscle of the Federal government? These are the women most affected by this decision. Where is 'Separation of Church and State' now, hmm?
I could care less what the spritual/religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers was. Their beliefs and opinions on religion and spirituality were far from "unified" in any sense of the word and in my opinion totally irrelevant to this discussion as this is not 1776, this is 2014, and if you haven't noticed things are remarkably different now than they were then.
What these people don't seem to understand: Just because your health insurance covers contraception, doesn't mean you're required to obtain and use it! These people who are going on and on about their so-called "faith"? How about they consider this a test of their "faith" to not obtain or purchase it instead of jamming their fucking "faith" down everyone else's throats!
Women have a right to have control over their own bodies. Get over it already and move on.
The bandwidth of your Internet connection is a fraction of the bandwidth of a local storage device will be. "The Cloud", in spite of any encryption used, still puts your data at risk of snooping and theft even from the company providing the service. "Cloud" service providers aren't forever. Enjoy having one go out of business and take you data with it, or fall prey to hackers that trash your data. The NSA loves "The Cloud" because it makes their job of snooping that much easier for them.
Just buy a USB hard drive and back up your important stuff to that then put it away in a safe place (safe deposit box at your bank if it's that important), or if it's small enough to burn to a DVD or Bluray disc, do that and store the disc(s) somewhere safe. Even USB flash drives come in sizes of hundreds of gigabytes and are not anywhere near as expensive as they used to be.
So you run Android in a VM inside Windows. So what? This isn't a new trick, and it's not newsworthy either. It smacks of shameless shilling. Seriously, nothing to see here, move along..
And I am deeply impressed at how anyone's brain could possibly take this subject and infer from it that I'm some sort of technology-rejecting Luddite, or that a pseudo-news website like/. belongs in the same conversation as e-books. Did you forget to take your medication yesterday or something? Or is that glioblastoma you've had brewing finally affecting your cognitive centers?
Wow, you sure are mad aren't you? Why would you get so angry over this subject.. unless you've got some of your own doubts on the subject but are too insecure to admit to them.;-)
Enjoy your e-reader and e-books, friend, and I'll just keep enjoying my lovely old paper books, and it's all good.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not even a climatologist, scientist, or even a meteorologist, but I seem to understand something that most people don't seem to: The weather where you're standing is just a small part of the overall system of weather that spans the entire planet. The implication of global warming means that there is more total energy in that global system of weather, which causes it's overall behaviour to change.
You're assuming there is some way to make Google give a damn. News Flash for you: They don't, and won't. Dump the account.
Congratulations, you're probably a victim of identity theft, and you don't even know it yet!
Why, in 2014, are you casually using your real name anywhere online that you aren't forced to? You should be using a pseudonym or going entirely anonymous as much as possible.
I thought they had been doing experiments with quantum entanglement that had possible implications for communications.
No, not FTL communications. I was thinking communications over long distances that wouldn't have many of the drawbacks of using radio. Oh well.. But I'm pretty sure NASA has been working on using laser communications between the Earth and the Moon, haven't they?
You mean utilize quantum entanglement? Maybe by the time someone is actually ready to go to Mars, they'll have developed the idea far enough to actually do it. Until then: Lasers.
Fuck the fuck off, pedo.
You're being funny, but the irony here is that someone out there is thinking precisely that.
So far as I'm concerned this comes under the general heading of "Technology we do not need". The First World is rapidly becoming a Technological Babylon.
That's an unnecessarily sensationalist headline if I ever saw one. Slashdot editors get modded down to "-1, Troll" for that so far as I'm concerned. Some random court making a ruling concerning one single website does not a huge controversy make.
All I'm saying is that it (child pornography) should be decriminalised.
*sigh*
This is your blind-spot: You cannot say this to people without appearing to be a pedophile. It doesn't matter why you are saying it or what your motivation is for saying it or what your "big picture" is, all people hear is "I think dirty pictures of children shouldn't be illegal". This includes law enforcement, by the way. If you say this thing in real life in front of other people, they will asssume you are a pedophile and you will be attacked as a pedophile. If you say it in front of law enforcement, they will assume you are a pedophile and you can then anticipate being investigated as a pedophile. You may as well say "I think the President of the United States should be killed", or "I'm glad the World Trade Center was destroyed by terrorists" or "Some women who are rape victims were asking for it"; no one will care WHY you're saying it, all they'll care about is that what you're saying is utterly wrong and totally offensive. There is "exercising your right to freedom of speech" and then there is "being an idiot and/or being an asshole", and in this case you are being the latter. Are you really so naive that you don't understand this, or is there just something wrong with your brain that doesn't allow you to understand this? Regardless of what may or may not be wrong with you, what you are saying here is completely and utterly wrong and there is no way you can justify it. You can continue to assert that "most people are idiots" all you want, it doesn't change something that the vast majority of adults alive today accept as "right", and that what you are saying is terribly wrong.
"Extreme attitude" indeed.
Listen, idiot, I'm going to say this one more time in as few words as possible, since you're either ignoring it or incapable of understanding. Please read every single word:
You cannot tell people "I think posession of child pornography should not be illegal" without people assuming (probably correctly!) that you are a pedophile. Furthermore: There is NO VALID REASON to be in posession of child pornography in the first place, unless you are indeed a pedophile.
I don't care what the police do, and I don't care if planting CP on people happens. People get framed for all sorts of crimes every single day and there is nothing you can do to stop that, not any more than you can stop people from speeding or running a stop sign when nobody's looking. However we have laws like this against the production and posession of CP for damn good reasons, and when you start making exceptions to the laws, you create loopholes actual criminals use to escape them. You don't like it, then tough shit, go sign up to be one of the first Mars colonists, then you can leave Earth with your likely sizable CP collection and be free of Earthly laws -- except when the other colonists discover your proclivities, they'll likely put you out the airlock.
Oh, and go ahead and call me names all you want, asshole, all you've done in this entire conversation is demonstrate that you're probably a child molestor or at least some sick piece of crap who masturbates to child pornography.
That's a basic tenet of running a business as it was explained to me. I'm sure the idea of people getting paid (even if it's micro-payments) for the use of the content they generate (basically, a royalty) would appeal to everyone, but I'm sure that if this became the law of the land somehow, website owners and companies would respond in two different ways:
1) "Social networking" sites like Facebook would cease to be free to use
2) Websites and companies would be constantly trying to short-change their users on micropayments, or at least low-ball them to keep profits up.
Additionally, this would more or less kill any possibility of anonymity on social networking sites or any other site that pays royalties for use of user-generated content, because they'd need legal names in order to make payments in a legal manner. It all seems like a nice idea on the surface, but once you start thinking it through you'd start to realize that this idea would completely destroy the Internet as we know it.
Oh, I see. So you're caught with CP, they remove and destroy it, but they don't arrest and interrogate you, investiage you on possibly being a pedophile? How convenient if you are a pedophile. Here's a clue for you: If you obtain child pornography through any means then you are a pedophile. Pedophiles eventually will evolve to actually molesting children because they are mentally ill and cannot help themselves, it's just a matter of time before a child is victimized by them. Furthermore, as I said earlier: If you advocate posession of CP not being a prosecutable offense then you are going to be accused by the vast majority of society of being a pedophile regardless of whether you are or not -- and that's a stain that will never wash off you. Therefore: You are either horribly naive, incredibly dumb, a pedophile, or just another troll stirring up shit. Which are you? Since you keep pushing the whole "de-criminalizing CP posession" agenda, my opinion is veering rapidly towards "pedophile in denial about who he is, trying to justify his stash of CP being 'OK' to have".
Go turn yourself in before you molest a child -- assuming you already haven't. And don't complain that I'm labelling you a pedophile, because I'm not, that's all on you, you've practically gone out of your way to label yourself as such in a public discussion forum.
You must be a troll, or you're just plain dumb. Your comment was read by me repeatedly, and as you will notice the relevant sections were quoted to prevent any misunderstandings, and you're ignoring what I said. If you said in public what you said there you'd have people jump all over you thinking you're a pedophile because any reasonable and sane person would not wish to advocate posession of child pornography being made legal, and I just can't see how you could be that dumb and yet be able to put together coherent (if rediculous) sentences, so you must be just another shitty troll. So far as calling me "reactionary" that's at least as rediculous as everything else you're insisting upon here so once again I must conclude you are just another shitty troll looking to get your jollies on the Internet. Don't bother replying to this as I believe I'm done wasting my time on just another troll.
Can you clarify what you mean by "not allowed to exist"?
Pornographic images of children victimizes children because children are incapable of giving Informed Consent due to their developmental level; the vast majority of people agree with this, as do I. The act of producing child pornography is illegal, the product itself, or posessing the product itself, are all illegal; the vast majority of people also agree with this, as do I. As such child pornographic materials need to be destroyed or at least removed permanently from circulation; the vast majority of people agree with this, as do I. If you don't for some reason then perhaps you need to re-examine yourself and your motivations. This is not the classical discussion of "What is art and what is pornography", because children, who cannot give Informed Consent are involved, not adults, who can.
In fact I'd suggest that decriminalising possession might be worth considering.
Are you a child molestor? Statements like that would lead most people to believe that you are.
I think you need to differentiate between "censorship" and "illegal content". I am not in any way, shape or form going to say that, for instance, child pornography should be allowed to exist, as the people who create and traffic in such material are predators, plain and simple, and need to be dealt with as the criminals they are. However the hue and cry to 'Protect the children!' is usually disingenuous at best, used merely as an emotional ploy to further someone's agenda.
On the other hand you may well be one of those people who truly believe that you know better what's best for all other people and for society in general, and thus your sense of moral superiority in turn makes you believe that anything you do is right and justified, regardless of the rights of others you are trampling on. If you're That Guy, then you are the one who needs to be censored, not the Internet.
"Internet censorship, in any way, shape, or form, is wrong, and I for one do not support it nor will I endure it, because while ostensibly it is to 'protect the children!', it is inevitably mis-used as a tool by politicians to further their own political and social agendas, and by proxy it is further mis-used by big business to increase their profits by silencing their competition. Lastly it has been proven time and time again that using blacklists to censor the internet simply does not work, and it inevitably will block perfectly 'acceptable' content while sometimes allowing 'unacceptable' content through. Therefore I do not wish to have anything to do with anything having to do with any form of censorship, please do not include me in it, and please do not bother me about this subject again."
This. I see anyone who even got involved with Bitcoin to be an idiot in the first place because I still believe in the end it's going to get squashed by governments and declared null, void, and illegal. All these copycats? They just exist to troll the idiots who feel like they "lost out" on Buttcoin in the first place. It may as well be Pogs or Beanie Babies or Pokemon, it's just useless collectible nonsense. The only "winners" in this case are companies like AMD and Nvidia who are selling more GPUs to idiots who are "mining" this stuff.
It's about forcing employers to pay for contraception for others.
The core of your argument here is:
Second, you do realize that atheism is itself a faith, right? That you are essentially replacing the Church with the State, right?
How so? If all Catholic-run businesses were staffed by so-called "Good Catholics" then this shouldn't even be an issue because none of the affected women would even dream of purchasing any form of contraception, right?
Let me ask you this: What about the women of child-bearing years who are working for Catholic-run businesses/organizations, but aren't Catholic? Is it OK for them to be discriminated against in this way, and be forced to pay full price for contraceptives, just because of who they work for? Do you expect them to go work somewhere else instead? Isn't this a Church enforcing it's Will on someone not associated with their religion via the muscle of the Federal government? These are the women most affected by this decision. Where is 'Separation of Church and State' now, hmm?
I could care less what the spritual/religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers was. Their beliefs and opinions on religion and spirituality were far from "unified" in any sense of the word and in my opinion totally irrelevant to this discussion as this is not 1776, this is 2014, and if you haven't noticed things are remarkably different now than they were then.
Excuse me, but I did say "USB hard drive" in my comment.
I'm glad someone else beside me said it first.
What these people don't seem to understand: Just because your health insurance covers contraception, doesn't mean you're required to obtain and use it! These people who are going on and on about their so-called "faith"? How about they consider this a test of their "faith" to not obtain or purchase it instead of jamming their fucking "faith" down everyone else's throats!
Women have a right to have control over their own bodies. Get over it already and move on.
"The Cloud", frankly, sucks.
The bandwidth of your Internet connection is a fraction of the bandwidth of a local storage device will be.
"The Cloud", in spite of any encryption used, still puts your data at risk of snooping and theft even from the company providing the service.
"Cloud" service providers aren't forever. Enjoy having one go out of business and take you data with it, or fall prey to hackers that trash your data.
The NSA loves "The Cloud" because it makes their job of snooping that much easier for them.
Just buy a USB hard drive and back up your important stuff to that then put it away in a safe place (safe deposit box at your bank if it's that important), or if it's small enough to burn to a DVD or Bluray disc, do that and store the disc(s) somewhere safe. Even USB flash drives come in sizes of hundreds of gigabytes and are not anywhere near as expensive as they used to be.
MS-DOS v3.3? You're kidding me, right? MS-DOS v5 or later, man!
So you run Android in a VM inside Windows. So what? This isn't a new trick, and it's not newsworthy either. It smacks of shameless shilling. Seriously, nothing to see here, move along..
And I am deeply impressed at how anyone's brain could possibly take this subject and infer from it that I'm some sort of technology-rejecting Luddite, or that a pseudo-news website like /. belongs in the same conversation as e-books. Did you forget to take your medication yesterday or something? Or is that glioblastoma you've had brewing finally affecting your cognitive centers?
Wow, you sure are mad aren't you? Why would you get so angry over this subject.. unless you've got some of your own doubts on the subject but are too insecure to admit to them. ;-)
Enjoy your e-reader and e-books, friend, and I'll just keep enjoying my lovely old paper books, and it's all good.