It was precisely what the terrorists wanted in the first place..
Stop with the script reading, please... With its credibility in the shitter, it's what the government wanted in the first place. They had to use the terrorism angle to get us wimps to go long without questioning anything and distract attention away form its other abuses. Anybody who disagreed was immediately tagged.. Worked like a charm.. Exploitation of natural instincts always does
You misspelled 'tag team partner'.. I could have believed there was an 'opposition party' if the democratic faction had taken any initiative to actually oppose the other sects in 2009... But what happened was that they only expanded their powers.. This has been standard operating procedure for a very long time.. That you believe these people oppose each other only plays into their scheme.. Despite all the feigned anger, they enjoy a 95% approval rating in every election.. Read up on "rotating villain" to see how they do it
The only place where you'll find laissez-faire capitalism is in contraband, and the graveyards are full of its practitioners... Everything else has always been regulated
This kinda proves that Google is not really a "search engine" per se, as if we needed any verification of that.. I guess we all have to send out our own crawlers to actually find anything outside the advertising realm. It's not that I mind seeing Twitter or similar removed, but I always wonder about the truly valuable stuff that's not being indexed because there's no ad link or contract involved.
So the government is unable to prevent people leaking sensitive diplomatic cables and embarrassing videos and documents...
Honeypot? I mean please, we're talking about Anna Nicole Smith here.. National Inquirer should sue for unfair competition, but they'd run up against sovereign immunity.
It would be a good idea to throw both GoDaddy and any other kind of centralized DNS out the window. In the long run, only ad hoc networks will be truly robust. Client-server of any kind is just too frail
In some ways it confirms my suspicions of how it was designed to maintain social/economic stratification. I do remember reading some things on how it was for protecting the publisher/distributor where the authors were completely written out of the deal. Thanks for that. Much appreciated!
Let's hand over the "War on Terrorism" No doubt they could deal with it more competently than the government. Their spy powers are unmatched. They can redirect all communications to some honeypot. I believe there's even a Google jail...
It's not about society. It's about protecting specific interests, to protect industry from the effects of new technology that threatens its existence. From Gutenberg's printing press right up through the present and into the future. There is very little difference between these rules and the "Red Flag" laws that attempted to interfere with the use of the horseless carriage. Imagine having to to disassemble and hide your computer or TV set every time you wanted to read a newspaper.
That's the part that everybody has gotten wrong so far.. Patents and copyrights are designed from the beginning to restrict the transfer and sharing of knowledge. If people are going to continue to claim property rights, they should pay a property tax. They should not be permitted to deny a license to use the property, and the government should be allowed to determine a reasonable price. Divulged knowledge is public property, exclusive privileges over it should come with a cost.
Slashdot Mirror
We're all gonna die!
BAH - They've been promising this stuff for over ten years now. I remember seeing it on that show "Beyond 2000" back in '98... Still waiting for it
It was precisely what the terrorists wanted in the first place..
Stop with the script reading, please... With its credibility in the shitter, it's what the government wanted in the first place. They had to use the terrorism angle to get us wimps to go long without questioning anything and distract attention away form its other abuses. Anybody who disagreed was immediately tagged.. Worked like a charm.. Exploitation of natural instincts always does
I thought the singular was "Jedus"
...opposition party...
You misspelled 'tag team partner'.. I could have believed there was an 'opposition party' if the democratic faction had taken any initiative to actually oppose the other sects in 2009... But what happened was that they only expanded their powers.. This has been standard operating procedure for a very long time.. That you believe these people oppose each other only plays into their scheme.. Despite all the feigned anger, they enjoy a 95% approval rating in every election.. Read up on "rotating villain" to see how they do it
That's one of the advantages of being a subscriber
The only place where you'll find laissez-faire capitalism is in contraband, and the graveyards are full of its practitioners... Everything else has always been regulated
One may think that getting out of Afghanistan and Iraq...
And Libya and Germany and Japan etc etc etc...
I don't see so well.. Will that fit into a twitter post?
This has nothing to do with advertising...
?? Google's entire premise is based on advertising. That's what put them where they are today.
results by Bing
built with Yahoo
Thanks, but no thanks
Angry Users... all chattering like a bunch of parakeets
This kinda proves that Google is not really a "search engine" per se, as if we needed any verification of that.. I guess we all have to send out our own crawlers to actually find anything outside the advertising realm. It's not that I mind seeing Twitter or similar removed, but I always wonder about the truly valuable stuff that's not being indexed because there's no ad link or contract involved.
Are there any useful alternatives?
Yeah, I guess I meant 'concerned'.. Kinda wished the speel checker worked up there :-)
The law will provide great incentive to develop new technologies to work around it.
From #4:
"If it works, it will be spectacular,"
If it doesn't , it will probably be more so, but we won't see it.
No cheap way... yet. Once you remove the human effort, all bets are off.
So the government is unable to prevent people leaking sensitive diplomatic cables and embarrassing videos and documents...
Honeypot? I mean please, we're talking about Anna Nicole Smith here.. National Inquirer should sue for unfair competition, but they'd run up against sovereign immunity.
Ad hoc WI-FI.. a little slow maybe, but still faster than Pony Express, or even Federal Express...
It would be a good idea to throw both GoDaddy and any other kind of centralized DNS out the window. In the long run, only ad hoc networks will be truly robust. Client-server of any kind is just too frail
In some ways it confirms my suspicions of how it was designed to maintain social/economic stratification. I do remember reading some things on how it was for protecting the publisher/distributor where the authors were completely written out of the deal. Thanks for that. Much appreciated!
Let's hand over the "War on Terrorism" No doubt they could deal with it more competently than the government. Their spy powers are unmatched. They can redirect all communications to some honeypot. I believe there's even a Google jail...
Gee, I didn't think I could have made it more obvious... Oh well, I'm not about to spoil it for the rest :-)
...but that was in fact the spin
Actually I could see the the point of these laws to minimize plagiarism, but beyond that they are an anathema to progress.
It's not about society. It's about protecting specific interests, to protect industry from the effects of new technology that threatens its existence. From Gutenberg's printing press right up through the present and into the future. There is very little difference between these rules and the "Red Flag" laws that attempted to interfere with the use of the horseless carriage. Imagine having to to disassemble and hide your computer or TV set every time you wanted to read a newspaper.
...their original intention...
That's the part that everybody has gotten wrong so far.. Patents and copyrights are designed from the beginning to restrict the transfer and sharing of knowledge. If people are going to continue to claim property rights, they should pay a property tax. They should not be permitted to deny a license to use the property, and the government should be allowed to determine a reasonable price. Divulged knowledge is public property, exclusive privileges over it should come with a cost.