Can't happen. The US has sovereign immunity. The judges have judicial immunity. The legislators have legislative immunity. The prosecutors have prosecutorial immunity. And everyone else has qualified immunity. They are literally above the law.
Fire is what you get when you combine a combustable material, oxygen, and heat. It's real, it's no lie. The combustable material is the fuel, oxygen is the oxident, and "burn" is the conversion of the fuel and oxygen to a different form. It's semantics, not lies.
I agree, it's not lies. But we also have to remember that it's still just semantics. There's no reason not to consider oxygen the fuel and carbohydrates the reducing agent.
This might be a good way to reduce the number of animals needed in research, which is a laudable goal. But it won't be able to replace them entirely. In vitro research always has to be confirmed in vivo. Nothing about this technology changes that.
Bread and circuses. The powerful cannot maintain their grip on power without bread and circuses to keep the people placated. We wouldn't want people having free time to reflect and come up with their own ideas, would we?
Or that the guy driving the get-away car for a bank robbery is also doing something illegal. So we at least have some legal precedent that not actually doing an illegal act, but enabling it is an illegal act is itself a crime.
This is a great analogy. What if the guy driving the get-away car is a taxi? What if he just picks people up and takes people places without asking too many questions? Is he guilty too? Should we force taxi drivers to obtain affadavits from their passengers declaring that their transportation is for legal purposes? Should we force search engines to verify the legality of the content they index? Is there a meaningful difference between the two?
Search engines are like taxis. They'll take you anywhere you ask them to. If they take you somewhere illegal, that's your fault not the taxi and not the search engine.
You want to get into the whole argument of "facilitating copyright violation" then you might as well sue network, computer and storage equipment manufacturers, not to mention anyone who ever built and sold a set of speakers.
No, Godwins law is as valid as it ever was. All Godwins law states is that as the length of a thread increases, the probability of someone mentioning Hitler or Nazis approaches one. The rebirth of fascism has only shifted that curve to the left a bit.
Which will last until you are outcompeted by people with fewer ethics than you. And if you are successful, your business will grow and your influence will decrease as a burgeoning sales department gets more powerful. What middle manager is going to fire his sales guys for meeting his numbers, even if his strategy goes against the corporate mission statement?
Programmers themselves really often make the mistake of thinking that everyone else's job is simple and easy and doesn't require much knowledge, or that companies should be spending more resources on programmers and IT than other departments. Best example is sales and marketing people.
No, we don't think it's an easy job. We think it's immoral.
Strict parallel construction fails when the subjects of the sentence are not actually analogous. Auto repair simply isn't the enabler that programming is. We encounter problems every day that can be, and should be automated. We don't encounter problems that require you to use a spark plug gapper on a daily basis.
Actual programming classes aren't vocational any more than writing classes are vocational. Not everyone is going to be an author, but everyone can benefit from knowing how to write well. The same goes for programming.
Programming is not just a vocation. It's a life skill. Nearly everone uses a computer daily, and everyones daily life could be improved by using a little automation. Even if you never write a script you use yourself, understanding how programming is done allows you to understand the kinds of things that can be done and helps you ask the right kinds of questions.
Programming is one of those skills everyone should at least be exposed to, in order to be a well rounded individual.
All of the candidates are exactly the same on any issue that really matters. They may dangle some shiny differences in front of you to distract you from the fact, but that's all it is, misdirection. They want you to focus on the.5% of issues where they differ, and not the 99.5% of issues where they are identical.
Take, for example, the biggest difference between the two parties during this presidency. That is on health care. If you look at it objectively, it's obvious that both the Democrats and the Republicans had the same goal. Maximizing profits for corporations, if perhaps a slightly different set of corporations. Nobody who thinks that corporate profits should not be our first priority ever gets a seat at the table.
This will be good news for everyone who just wants to browse the web and doesn't need their browser to change every other week. In other words, just about everyone. I expect most users will be on ESR before long.
Any government that is powerful enough to protect me from aggressors who want to take my stuff is powerful enough to take my stuff. The only question is how much of a say do I get. Government is at least potentially democratic. I will take that over skirmishes in the streets between private armies any time.
There are enough potentially cool games that we can afford to be picky. I'm not missing out on anything by not buying Diablo 3. Any time I would have spent with Diablo 3 will be spent with another potentially cool game, and I'll have just as much fun.
It's harder to bribe 100 million Americans than it is their representatives. Since you can't count on representatives doing their jobs, I don't see what the point is in having them. Anyone who wants a representative is free to delegate his vote to someone else.
We do, because we can't have capitalism. In capitalism, money makes money faster than labor does. This effect compounds on itself to produce inequality. Since economic power and political power are equivalent, this produces political inequality as well. This allows those who got rich during the brief period of capitalism to lock down their positions through political means. That is corporatism.
Slashdot Mirror
Can't happen. The US has sovereign immunity. The judges have judicial immunity. The legislators have legislative immunity. The prosecutors have prosecutorial immunity. And everyone else has qualified immunity. They are literally above the law.
Once you join the EU, you're not a sovereign government anymore.
Fire is what you get when you combine a combustable material, oxygen, and heat. It's real, it's no lie. The combustable material is the fuel, oxygen is the oxident, and "burn" is the conversion of the fuel and oxygen to a different form. It's semantics, not lies.
I agree, it's not lies. But we also have to remember that it's still just semantics. There's no reason not to consider oxygen the fuel and carbohydrates the reducing agent.
Until we eliminate poverty, nothing is truly voluntary.
Copying is free speech. So all attempts to stop copying are also attempts to stop free speech.
No, that's nationalism. Fascism as the merger of state and corporate power comes directly from the mouth of Benito Mussolini.
This might be a good way to reduce the number of animals needed in research, which is a laudable goal. But it won't be able to replace them entirely. In vitro research always has to be confirmed in vivo. Nothing about this technology changes that.
Bread and circuses. The powerful cannot maintain their grip on power without bread and circuses to keep the people placated. We wouldn't want people having free time to reflect and come up with their own ideas, would we?
Or that the guy driving the get-away car for a bank robbery is also doing something illegal. So we at least have some legal precedent that not actually doing an illegal act, but enabling it is an illegal act is itself a crime.
This is a great analogy. What if the guy driving the get-away car is a taxi? What if he just picks people up and takes people places without asking too many questions? Is he guilty too? Should we force taxi drivers to obtain affadavits from their passengers declaring that their transportation is for legal purposes? Should we force search engines to verify the legality of the content they index? Is there a meaningful difference between the two?
Search engines are like taxis. They'll take you anywhere you ask them to. If they take you somewhere illegal, that's your fault not the taxi and not the search engine.
You want to get into the whole argument of "facilitating copyright violation" then you might as well sue network, computer and storage equipment manufacturers, not to mention anyone who ever built and sold a set of speakers.
Don't worry, that's coming.
No, Godwins law is as valid as it ever was. All Godwins law states is that as the length of a thread increases, the probability of someone mentioning Hitler or Nazis approaches one. The rebirth of fascism has only shifted that curve to the left a bit.
Which will last until you are outcompeted by people with fewer ethics than you. And if you are successful, your business will grow and your influence will decrease as a burgeoning sales department gets more powerful. What middle manager is going to fire his sales guys for meeting his numbers, even if his strategy goes against the corporate mission statement?
Programmers themselves really often make the mistake of thinking that everyone else's job is simple and easy and doesn't require much knowledge, or that companies should be spending more resources on programmers and IT than other departments. Best example is sales and marketing people.
No, we don't think it's an easy job. We think it's immoral.
Strict parallel construction fails when the subjects of the sentence are not actually analogous. Auto repair simply isn't the enabler that programming is. We encounter problems every day that can be, and should be automated. We don't encounter problems that require you to use a spark plug gapper on a daily basis.
Does the verdict say exactly that, or are there weasel words about a "good faith belief" in there?
Actual programming classes aren't vocational any more than writing classes are vocational. Not everyone is going to be an author, but everyone can benefit from knowing how to write well. The same goes for programming.
Programming is not just a vocation. It's a life skill. Nearly everone uses a computer daily, and everyones daily life could be improved by using a little automation. Even if you never write a script you use yourself, understanding how programming is done allows you to understand the kinds of things that can be done and helps you ask the right kinds of questions.
Programming is one of those skills everyone should at least be exposed to, in order to be a well rounded individual.
All of the candidates are exactly the same on any issue that really matters. They may dangle some shiny differences in front of you to distract you from the fact, but that's all it is, misdirection. They want you to focus on the .5% of issues where they differ, and not the 99.5% of issues where they are identical.
Take, for example, the biggest difference between the two parties during this presidency. That is on health care. If you look at it objectively, it's obvious that both the Democrats and the Republicans had the same goal. Maximizing profits for corporations, if perhaps a slightly different set of corporations. Nobody who thinks that corporate profits should not be our first priority ever gets a seat at the table.
This will be good news for everyone who just wants to browse the web and doesn't need their browser to change every other week. In other words, just about everyone. I expect most users will be on ESR before long.
Just install a minimal distro like Debian (via netinst) or Arch, and then install only what's needed to surf.
Any government that is powerful enough to protect me from aggressors who want to take my stuff is powerful enough to take my stuff. The only question is how much of a say do I get. Government is at least potentially democratic. I will take that over skirmishes in the streets between private armies any time.
There are enough potentially cool games that we can afford to be picky. I'm not missing out on anything by not buying Diablo 3. Any time I would have spent with Diablo 3 will be spent with another potentially cool game, and I'll have just as much fun.
It's harder to bribe 100 million Americans than it is their representatives. Since you can't count on representatives doing their jobs, I don't see what the point is in having them. Anyone who wants a representative is free to delegate his vote to someone else.
We do, because we can't have capitalism. In capitalism, money makes money faster than labor does. This effect compounds on itself to produce inequality. Since economic power and political power are equivalent, this produces political inequality as well. This allows those who got rich during the brief period of capitalism to lock down their positions through political means. That is corporatism.
Capitalism is an unsustainable utopian idea.
I have an answer. Socialism and direct democracy.