Not unless they shoot first... We have yet to yet to adequately explore the democratic process. So far all but about 2% of the voting public like things just as they are, even if the papers say they claim otherwise.
They've forgotten that banning beer did not work in the 1920s, nor has banning the plant marijuana/hemp worked in the present day.
Prohibition is very profitable and it has many industries, like law enforcement(police departments, small arms, prisons, etc.) wrapped around and entirely dependent on it. And it provides a nice off the books income for corrupt officials all the way to the top. To say it doesn't work is a very narrow view.
It will encourage us to find an alternative technologies separate from government/corporate controlled communication services... In theory anyway. Most people won't care.
I hope to win, or I wouldn't buy the ticket. BUT.. the kicker is I don't blame the lottery people when I don't win. And that's the only part makes my argument analogous to the political issue here.
I can hope that people vote the way I do, but I don't blame "the system" in any way if they don't. Doing so is just plain foolish, and only diverts attention away from the real problem. The politician can take great advantage of your feeling of hopelessness, and they often do. And it often works. If you want all sorts of regulations, how are you going to get them if nobody votes for the people that would implement them? And if you did vote for such people, you will have proven my point.
Redundant eh? Yeah well, some things need to hammered over and over again into your mushy little brains to get it to sink in. You may now resume your regular whining.
Sorry. Somehow the 've must have been skipped after "And I".
That wasn't what I was talking about. Here, I'll repost the part you are having trouble comprehending: If if you're going to cry about how the "system" is rigged against you, save your breath. I'll have none of it. You all are just cursing darkness instead of lighting a candle. There is no law on the books that require you to vote for spoon fed by mass media candidates.. yet. Try to understand a candidate needs nothing more than majority of votes to win. Money is totally irrelevant... if the voters decide to make it so. You are the system, so when you complain about it, you are only complaining about yourself.
I still hold that his actions fit the generally accepted definition of treason.
Luckily, the law isn't applied in that fashion. The only acceptable definition is that which is codified into law. And the law of the land is pretty specific what constitutes treason. The death penalty is a matter of convenience. It sure isn't working as a deterrent. There's no "morality" backing it up. And a civilized society doesn't kill people absent of immediate danger. Only savages do that.
The death penalty (aka: murder by the state) is wrong no matter what. Once a person is rendered harmless, you have no right to kill him. And in case you haven't noticed, he wasn't convicted of treason.
And I got two choices who have a reasonable chance of winning.
Looks like you don't read too good... In that case, just continue following the crowd then.. Always safer to go with the winner, right? Even as they lead you right over the cliff.
Probably so. In fact, I would go so far as to say the US did it at their requests. The real arms race throughout the world is between a government and its citizens. I believe the US regards only those who restrict American business as "repressive". Otherwise most of Latin America, Asia, and Africa would be on the list.
Slashdot Mirror
Watever it takes to drive away customers and make the alternatives more desirable. Businesses won't tolerate it, and Microsoft will listen to them.
Butterfly nets
Maybe, just maybe, we don't have this evil, oppressive government that everyone claims.
Need I remind you as to which country has the highest percentage of its population in prison? And in raw numbers??
I don't remember much of what I saw with mine, but I do remember being able to focus the telescope better than that :-)
Not unless they shoot first... We have yet to yet to adequately explore the democratic process. So far all but about 2% of the voting public like things just as they are, even if the papers say they claim otherwise.
Jupiter and Saturn too. You can even see some of their moons.
They've forgotten that banning beer did not work in the 1920s, nor has banning the plant marijuana/hemp worked in the present day.
Prohibition is very profitable and it has many industries, like law enforcement(police departments, small arms, prisons, etc.) wrapped around and entirely dependent on it. And it provides a nice off the books income for corrupt officials all the way to the top. To say it doesn't work is a very narrow view.
more intrusive != better paying.. more intrusive simply means more intrusive.
Even "darknets" have to go through the telcos/cable. You can still get shut down. It's time for something completely different.
It will encourage us to find an alternative technologies separate from government/corporate controlled communication services... In theory anyway. Most people won't care.
And here it's NSA/Google to you mister..
Tell me, do you buy lottery tickets?
Sometimes. You can't win if you don't play.
Do you expect to win?
I hope to win, or I wouldn't buy the ticket. BUT.. the kicker is I don't blame the lottery people when I don't win. And that's the only part makes my argument analogous to the political issue here.
I can hope that people vote the way I do, but I don't blame "the system" in any way if they don't. Doing so is just plain foolish, and only diverts attention away from the real problem. The politician can take great advantage of your feeling of hopelessness, and they often do. And it often works. If you want all sorts of regulations, how are you going to get them if nobody votes for the people that would implement them? And if you did vote for such people, you will have proven my point.
A cost/benefit analysis of switching might come in handy. There are other support issues besides just security.
Redundant eh? Yeah well, some things need to hammered over and over again into your mushy little brains to get it to sink in. You may now resume your regular whining.
Heh.. saved locally to see if that actually happens
...it's just annoying that we let MS get away with this crap.
You're welcome
Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor?
Ok to make a backup first?
An IBM mouse nub thingy... The only way to fly.
Sorry. Somehow the 've must have been skipped after "And I".
That wasn't what I was talking about. Here, I'll repost the part you are having trouble comprehending: If if you're going to cry about how the "system" is rigged against you, save your breath. I'll have none of it. You all are just cursing darkness instead of lighting a candle. There is no law on the books that require you to vote for spoon fed by mass media candidates.. yet. Try to understand a candidate needs nothing more than majority of votes to win. Money is totally irrelevant... if the voters decide to make it so. You are the system, so when you complain about it, you are only complaining about yourself.
I still hold that his actions fit the generally accepted definition of treason.
Luckily, the law isn't applied in that fashion. The only acceptable definition is that which is codified into law. And the law of the land is pretty specific what constitutes treason. The death penalty is a matter of convenience. It sure isn't working as a deterrent. There's no "morality" backing it up. And a civilized society doesn't kill people absent of immediate danger. Only savages do that.
The death penalty (aka: murder by the state) is wrong no matter what. Once a person is rendered harmless, you have no right to kill him. And in case you haven't noticed, he wasn't convicted of treason.
Instead, we imprison with cable TV and free health care.
And don't forget all the free sex...
So you're going to bust a guy for buying a bag of oregano?
And I got two choices who have a reasonable chance of winning.
Looks like you don't read too good... In that case, just continue following the crowd then.. Always safer to go with the winner, right? Even as they lead you right over the cliff.
I don't think the governments on that list mind.
Probably so. In fact, I would go so far as to say the US did it at their requests. The real arms race throughout the world is between a government and its citizens. I believe the US regards only those who restrict American business as "repressive". Otherwise most of Latin America, Asia, and Africa would be on the list.