Give me a candidate who speaks out against the war on drugs.
At the risk of being moderated offtopic, I'll give you two. I will do so because I believe that this is the most important issue and the mainstream candidates simply won't discuss it. Small tax cuts and boosts to social security just do not impress me when Bush and Gore will continue to have peaceful Americans thrown in jail for doing nothing wrong while others are forced to live in fear. They mean nothing to me when the first and fourth amendment are being stripped and property can be seized at will. So I cannot vote for any candidate who supports the war on drugs.
Harry Browne the Libertarian Party candidate, has vowed to pardon all nonviolent drug offenders on his first day as president. His explanation of his views on drugs is most impressive.
Hopefully, this will help you (and others) make a truly informed vote, one to protect our freedom.
And despite what you may think, obscenity is not illegal.
This has nothing to do with what I think. This is the legal definition. Obscenity has been (and still is) defined by the Supreme Court as being illegal and not having constitutional protection. Material that is merely pornographic is not obscene and is protected by the first amendment.
This has nothing to do with the first amendment. They want to block obscenity and child pornography. Obscenity and child pornography are illegal. They are not protected by the constitution. If you don't like that, you can try to fight to have obsenity and child pornography legalized, but until then, you'll have trouble fighting laws against them.
I can talk with a passenger without using any hands. Only if you have a cell phone that allows you to do the same, should you be able to use it while driving.
I didn't say that the birth rate was above replacement level, I said that the population was growing. That includes immigration. Of course, that's just the US. There are countries in Europe, for example, that have zero or even negative population growth.
cd's will be replaced to "force everyone to buy the new players and buy yet another copy of Billy Joel's Greatest Hits to go with the LP, cassette and CD they already have." I doubt that. After all, won't the dvd players that play audio dvd's also play cd's? If I was buying one, that is certainly a feature I would require, and the same must be true of a lot of other people.
This is one of the problems with the mp3 encoding system. Sometimes the sounds you don't hear are as important as the ones you do; they can deeply affect your emotions or perceptions of the music to which you are listening. By stripping inaudible sounds, people think they can remove a watermark without affecting the music, but really they have affected it greatly.
You know I've been to plenty of people's houses and I've never actually seen a vcr flashing 12:00. I really think that the idea that half of all people, or however many, can't set the time on their vcr is just bullshit.
As much as people in general may be bad with technology, they also hate things flashing at them. That's why ns's <blink> tag was so maligned.
Allowing an of wide variety of names to be used as tld's makes them no longer than useful for figuring out what kind of site you're going to, so why not eliminate them all together? People who are intimidated by the internet would find an address like microsoft much more friendly than microsoft.com.
A lot of people enjoy drugs exactly because they're smart. When you have an interesting mind, it's something you want to explore fully. Also, you are harder to brainwash with government propaganda (ok, that's not always the case, but it can be). I went to Stuyvesant, a very smart specialized math/science high school in nyc and everybody used acid and e. People would just sit in the halls or outside the school selling and tons of people would come over to them. Of course, I can't explain the desire to use meth or coke, which are the subjects of this article, but here's something to think about anyway.
I find this surprising. While I don't play games of chance where the odds are against me (that's just stupid), I have developed a deep fascination with poker, as have a lot of other smart, geeky people I know. It's game of both math and social skills where, if you're good, you can actually win money, unlike say craps. In a casino, they get plenty of my time over at the poker tables, I'm surprised the same isn't true of other tech people. (On a related note, I hear that Bill Gates plays, and he does horribly at. His team also got massacred in that bridge tournament. I guess these games do involve skill).
The difference isn't just that it's so much harder to make a good living as a musician but that it can cost thousands of dollars in studio time, etc. to produce an album, while writing a program just requires a computer, which the programmer would probably already have anyway.
A regular bookmarked site is fine. All they're talking about is that the links ie provides go through ms. Yes, those would stop working if you blocked traffic to there.
I don't think his defense of ie is overstated at all. I hate microsoft, and don't have any of their software on my computer, but I even think ie is far better than netscape. It's noticably faster in loading pages. It's really good with remembering what you've typed into forms so it offers the right things at the right time so you don't have to type them again. And at any job I've had doing web programming, most of the problems/bugs we had were ns only. I don't remember ever having to fix a bug and being told "this only happens in ie..."
the legal system does not allow you to play "what if" games. Prove the damages and then you might see a favourable judgement.
Not only does the legal system allow "what if" games, that's what "proving damages" is. It's guessing where you would be if something (like Napster) hadn't happened and then showing how much you lost as a result.
He's obviously not serious. If he were as broke as he lets on, he wouldn't have the kind of fast internet connection he's talking about, or a cd burner. Unless he's doing this at work, but if that's how he spends his work day, he's not earning his $1/hr (as opposed to me, who is at work posting this).
The MPAA letter pretty clearly says that the recent court ruling outlwas
linking any Internet web site, either directly or through a series of links, to any other Internet web site containing DeCSS.
What you're referring to is the "series of links" they refer to. What I want to know is, what if rather providing a link, I simply print the url and allow people to cut and paste it into the adress bar?
Care about freedom?
Re:Is LEGO a proprietary standard?
on
The LEGO Desk
·
· Score: 1
> Back OT
Are you really using OT as an abreviation for "on topic"? Do you not see the potential confusion this acronym will cause? How can be ever know whether the O is for "off" or "on"?
Slashdot Mirror
At the risk of being moderated offtopic, I'll give you two. I will do so because I believe that this is the most important issue and the mainstream candidates simply won't discuss it. Small tax cuts and boosts to social security just do not impress me when Bush and Gore will continue to have peaceful Americans thrown in jail for doing nothing wrong while others are forced to live in fear. They mean nothing to me when the first and fourth amendment are being stripped and property can be seized at will. So I cannot vote for any candidate who supports the war on drugs.
If you care, you can vote for:
- Although his site doesn't seem to think it's important enough to even list it as one of "the issues", Ralph Nader has called for major changes to the drug war. In particular, he wants to support marijuana legalisation, calling to change our "self-defeating and antiquated drug laws."
- Harry Browne the Libertarian Party candidate, has vowed to pardon all nonviolent drug offenders on his first day as president. His explanation of his views on drugs is most impressive.
Hopefully, this will help you (and others) make a truly informed vote, one to protect our freedom.Care about freedom?
This has nothing to do with what I think. This is the legal definition. Obscenity has been (and still is) defined by the Supreme Court as being illegal and not having constitutional protection. Material that is merely pornographic is not obscene and is protected by the first amendment.
Care about freedom?
This has nothing to do with the first amendment. They want to block obscenity and child pornography. Obscenity and child pornography are illegal. They are not protected by the constitution. If you don't like that, you can try to fight to have obsenity and child pornography legalized, but until then, you'll have trouble fighting laws against them.
Care about freedom?
I can talk with a passenger without using any hands. Only if you have a cell phone that allows you to do the same, should you be able to use it while driving.
Care about freedom?
I didn't say that the birth rate was above replacement level, I said that the population was growing. That includes immigration. Of course, that's just the US. There are countries in Europe, for example, that have zero or even negative population growth.
Care about freedom?
cd's will be replaced to "force everyone to buy the new players and buy yet another copy of Billy Joel's Greatest Hits to go with the LP, cassette and CD they already have." I doubt that. After all, won't the dvd players that play audio dvd's also play cd's? If I was buying one, that is certainly a feature I would require, and the same must be true of a lot of other people.
Care about freedom?
This is one of the problems with the mp3 encoding system. Sometimes the sounds you don't hear are as important as the ones you do; they can deeply affect your emotions or perceptions of the music to which you are listening. By stripping inaudible sounds, people think they can remove a watermark without affecting the music, but really they have affected it greatly.
Care about freedom?
do you really think they would tell you about it? Of course not! They have have a hidden camera and lan connection that they tried to keep a secret.
Care about freedom?
As much as people in general may be bad with technology, they also hate things flashing at them. That's why ns's <blink> tag was so maligned.
Care about freedom?
Allowing an of wide variety of names to be used as tld's makes them no longer than useful for figuring out what kind of site you're going to, so why not eliminate them all together? People who are intimidated by the internet would find an address like microsoft much more friendly than microsoft.com.
Care about freedom?
A lot of people enjoy drugs exactly because they're smart. When you have an interesting mind, it's something you want to explore fully. Also, you are harder to brainwash with government propaganda (ok, that's not always the case, but it can be). I went to Stuyvesant, a very smart specialized math/science high school in nyc and everybody used acid and e. People would just sit in the halls or outside the school selling and tons of people would come over to them. Of course, I can't explain the desire to use meth or coke, which are the subjects of this article, but here's something to think about anyway.
Care about freedom?
I find this surprising. While I don't play games of chance where the odds are against me (that's just stupid), I have developed a deep fascination with poker, as have a lot of other smart, geeky people I know. It's game of both math and social skills where, if you're good, you can actually win money, unlike say craps. In a casino, they get plenty of my time over at the poker tables, I'm surprised the same isn't true of other tech people. (On a related note, I hear that Bill Gates plays, and he does horribly at. His team also got massacred in that bridge tournament. I guess these games do involve skill).
Care about freedom?
The difference isn't just that it's so much harder to make a good living as a musician but that it can cost thousands of dollars in studio time, etc. to produce an album, while writing a program just requires a computer, which the programmer would probably already have anyway.
Care about freedom?
Huh? Why doesn't that matter? It's pretty simple to record/copy the analog sound that's coming out of your speakers; any cheap microphone can do it.
Care about freedom?
A regular bookmarked site is fine. All they're talking about is that the links ie provides go through ms. Yes, those would stop working if you blocked traffic to there.
Care about freedom?
I don't think his defense of ie is overstated at all. I hate microsoft, and don't have any of their software on my computer, but I even think ie is far better than netscape. It's noticably faster in loading pages. It's really good with remembering what you've typed into forms so it offers the right things at the right time so you don't have to type them again. And at any job I've had doing web programming, most of the problems/bugs we had were ns only. I don't remember ever having to fix a bug and being told "this only happens in ie..."
Care about freedom?
Care about freedom?
He's obviously not serious. If he were as broke as he lets on, he wouldn't have the kind of fast internet connection he's talking about, or a cd burner. Unless he's doing this at work, but if that's how he spends his work day, he's not earning his $1/hr (as opposed to me, who is at work posting this).
Care about freedom?
Huh, imagine that. Pirates trying to benefit from someone else's work.
Care about freedom?
> A LEGAL DOC saying they won't
>do it again...
It was illegal in the first place. They're not allowed to do it again whether they sign something or not.
Care about freedom?
> what's up with the whacked out colours? They demonstrate why you should be programming in php rather than perl (like slashcode is).
Care about freedom?
Care about freedom?
Yes, good job RMS.
Care about freedom?
What I want to know is, what if rather providing a link, I simply print the url and allow people to cut and paste it into the adress bar?
Care about freedom?
> Back OT Are you really using OT as an abreviation for "on topic"? Do you not see the potential confusion this acronym will cause? How can be ever know whether the O is for "off" or "on"?
Care about freedom?