Taking away all rights is what they would give up. as would EFF give up the purely user centric definition of rights ie we want it for free, or better yet pay us to consume your goods. Some rights would be kept others wouldn't, hopefully in a manner that made sense and benefited most.
the article notes that what is being talked about is a wish list submitted and isn't even as close as proposed legislation. this article is also on eff's site who have their own narrow minded goals. this is part of democracy where groups negotiate with each other to get what they want. to negotiate you have to give something up, so the industry is proposing a lot of things it knows will get removed and likewise eff calls attention to things it would like to be removed but never will be. everyone is doing their job as long as citizens stay informed and these 'interest' groups work together to get an outcome more people will find acceptable.
just because they help in some way doesn't mean that they help in the most efficient way, then he should complain for either taxes that more fairly charge him for the services he uses or that they be better administered. we chose a democracy so that we could complain.
because there are other things you could be doing and you should be able to file until the last minute. anyways there is a chance you might die before the taxes are due and then you wasted time you could have spent having fun instead of doing a boring and as it turns out pointless task. there you go procrastination explained.
actually protectionism in general is a horrible idea. the idea is that if the Chinese can produce shirts cheaper than us they should do that while we perform the tasks we are best at. important point is that 'cheap' refers to what we can't produce while making shirts. Since Americans can produce much more in terms of designing machines that can make shirts for us with little human help ie the Chinese then we should work on that and one person working in china does not mean that is a lost job here that person whose job was outsourced now has a reason to look for other work that is not as easily outsourced. why on earth I would want to buy from a less productive source I have no idea and in fact rewards inefficiency. however the chinese are not operating on an even playing field since they play games with their currency and continue to buy our debt. what we need first is a trade BALANCE with china so that we are sending as much of value to them as they are to us remember a billion dollars worth of crap is still worth a billion dollars. we also need to make trade treaties that encourage the same working environment that we require here in the states so that any advantage is not in cutting corners in workers rights otherwise we might as well make the ghettos here so that the poor of our country can make the items and cut out the shipping costs.
hi yes it is time to update your pass word. please enter below your current password and new password. then the phisy site changes it for you logs you in and has two of your passwords profit
I agree but they set the bar pretty high for themselves. As big of a company as they are they have the chance to do a lot of good or evil and they asked to be held to higher standards and we held them to higher standards.
He can only veto laws that come across his desk. He can't force new laws to appear on his desk like magic, he has to get the lawmakers to write them for him and then he can enforce it. Sure he could cry and bitch and fit and veto everything that came across his desk until the health care came across but that would have enjoyed even less support and is not how anyone really wants our government to be run there is a reason no one single person is in control. Sometimes you just have to work within the system to get the best situation you can and assuming he wants to be reelected he has that to be concerned about as well.
First of all I was referring to many people here in the U.S. specifically fox but many of its followers. Second Ahmadinejad is not worth mentioning he can't have his post without permission of Khameni.I think allowing the purchase of billions of dollars worth of oil from 'tin-pot' dictators everyday is more damaging than looking 'pathetic' I'm just not sure pleasuring the king of Saudi Arabia with all of his oil money is hurting him as much as we would like to think. As for the emperor of Japan I'm not sure he is a tin-pot dictator anymore. Those are the only two cases I know of so one tin-pot out of how many does not exactly qualify as every one. Also for those non tinpots would it hurt for the U.S. to treat other world leaders as equals? I mean they are all leaders of their country and sometimes we can't just demand things sometimes asking for them works a lot better.
the president is just one piece of government. for real change we would need to remove all, or at least the majority, of those involved in our government. There are many things where Obama has tried new approaches but was shut down by various people. Take for example his attempts to reach out to Iran, he was called a coward for it and we were all told he was making us look weak and was then pressured to give up on negotiating with Iran after only a few weeks. This has been repeated several other places and he had to go along with it to get his health care reform passed which was effectively neutered but still an improvement. It is called negotiating. And his successes are ignored, renewed SALT anyone?
well first I was merely arguing an opposing viewpoint devil's advocate and all. second, to you it may be bad reasoning as well as to me as I don't believe that I go to hell for having sex. but for those afraid of eternal damnation anything that leads even in the smallest way to infinite punishment for finite reward is going to be bad and something they should clearly avoid. feel free to laugh at me for considering more than my side of an argument but it is also poor reasoning to think that you are inherently right and anyone arguing against you is wrong, the exact kind of narcissistic viewpoint that these religious crazies believe.
most likely the "sexual assault" would be forcing children, or whose parents, who don't want to learn to learn this material. I'm no lawyer but I know that 'talking' someone into sex who is not expected to know the implications of their actions is also illegal so taking advantage of children who don't fully understand the meaning of the class and might object to learning the material if they were more developed could also be construed as assault or violation. Next time remember that things that appear insane to you are most likely logical to someone with either more knowledge or a different value set than you.
no, your solution is a band-aid that only covers up the real problem. Voters that are swayed by fancy campaign ads are the real problem. If everyone in this country took their civic duty seriously and researched from reliable sources while completely discounting campaign ads that would fix the real problem. Prohibiting corporations from making contributions is protecting the electorate from themselves since they can't seem to do it. And as long as the electorate doesn't have to it wont and will never learn to.
mostly it is the fact that a. it is required by law and b. it is all in one place. One database is much easier to search than thousands of them especially once 'inconsistencies' are found.
2, although it is not a big stretch to take my argument another level of individuals not being able to force their views on others thus advocating anarchy which personally I don't think would work mostly and would instead advocate libertarianism.
"deprecate evil wherever it is." Question: whose evil? and "We can't change the world alone, but almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech, women's rights, and freedom of self-determination are a good thing." that is only a very very recent development I mean even slavery was only completely, at least legally, eradicated half way through the 1900's.
flame me but can't we just let countries choose their own path? there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone's throat. yes I do like my country but am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit. we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes.
Slashdot Mirror
Taking away all rights is what they would give up. as would EFF give up the purely user centric definition of rights ie we want it for free, or better yet pay us to consume your goods. Some rights would be kept others wouldn't, hopefully in a manner that made sense and benefited most.
the article notes that what is being talked about is a wish list submitted and isn't even as close as proposed legislation. this article is also on eff's site who have their own narrow minded goals. this is part of democracy where groups negotiate with each other to get what they want. to negotiate you have to give something up, so the industry is proposing a lot of things it knows will get removed and likewise eff calls attention to things it would like to be removed but never will be. everyone is doing their job as long as citizens stay informed and these 'interest' groups work together to get an outcome more people will find acceptable.
just because they help in some way doesn't mean that they help in the most efficient way, then he should complain for either taxes that more fairly charge him for the services he uses or that they be better administered. we chose a democracy so that we could complain.
because there are other things you could be doing and you should be able to file until the last minute. anyways there is a chance you might die before the taxes are due and then you wasted time you could have spent having fun instead of doing a boring and as it turns out pointless task. there you go procrastination explained.
or you could just save in a bank account. even your wallet or a shoe box under the bed would work if you don't have access to a bank.
actually protectionism in general is a horrible idea. the idea is that if the Chinese can produce shirts cheaper than us they should do that while we perform the tasks we are best at. important point is that 'cheap' refers to what we can't produce while making shirts. Since Americans can produce much more in terms of designing machines that can make shirts for us with little human help ie the Chinese then we should work on that and one person working in china does not mean that is a lost job here that person whose job was outsourced now has a reason to look for other work that is not as easily outsourced. why on earth I would want to buy from a less productive source I have no idea and in fact rewards inefficiency. however the chinese are not operating on an even playing field since they play games with their currency and continue to buy our debt. what we need first is a trade BALANCE with china so that we are sending as much of value to them as they are to us remember a billion dollars worth of crap is still worth a billion dollars. we also need to make trade treaties that encourage the same working environment that we require here in the states so that any advantage is not in cutting corners in workers rights otherwise we might as well make the ghettos here so that the poor of our country can make the items and cut out the shipping costs.
hi yes it is time to update your pass word. please enter below your current password and new password. then the phisy site changes it for you logs you in and has two of your passwords profit
I agree but they set the bar pretty high for themselves. As big of a company as they are they have the chance to do a lot of good or evil and they asked to be held to higher standards and we held them to higher standards.
He can only veto laws that come across his desk. He can't force new laws to appear on his desk like magic, he has to get the lawmakers to write them for him and then he can enforce it. Sure he could cry and bitch and fit and veto everything that came across his desk until the health care came across but that would have enjoyed even less support and is not how anyone really wants our government to be run there is a reason no one single person is in control. Sometimes you just have to work within the system to get the best situation you can and assuming he wants to be reelected he has that to be concerned about as well.
First of all I was referring to many people here in the U.S. specifically fox but many of its followers. Second Ahmadinejad is not worth mentioning he can't have his post without permission of Khameni.I think allowing the purchase of billions of dollars worth of oil from 'tin-pot' dictators everyday is more damaging than looking 'pathetic' I'm just not sure pleasuring the king of Saudi Arabia with all of his oil money is hurting him as much as we would like to think. As for the emperor of Japan I'm not sure he is a tin-pot dictator anymore. Those are the only two cases I know of so one tin-pot out of how many does not exactly qualify as every one. Also for those non tinpots would it hurt for the U.S. to treat other world leaders as equals? I mean they are all leaders of their country and sometimes we can't just demand things sometimes asking for them works a lot better.
the president is just one piece of government. for real change we would need to remove all, or at least the majority, of those involved in our government. There are many things where Obama has tried new approaches but was shut down by various people. Take for example his attempts to reach out to Iran, he was called a coward for it and we were all told he was making us look weak and was then pressured to give up on negotiating with Iran after only a few weeks. This has been repeated several other places and he had to go along with it to get his health care reform passed which was effectively neutered but still an improvement. It is called negotiating. And his successes are ignored, renewed SALT anyone?
well first I was merely arguing an opposing viewpoint devil's advocate and all. second, to you it may be bad reasoning as well as to me as I don't believe that I go to hell for having sex. but for those afraid of eternal damnation anything that leads even in the smallest way to infinite punishment for finite reward is going to be bad and something they should clearly avoid. feel free to laugh at me for considering more than my side of an argument but it is also poor reasoning to think that you are inherently right and anyone arguing against you is wrong, the exact kind of narcissistic viewpoint that these religious crazies believe.
most likely the "sexual assault" would be forcing children, or whose parents, who don't want to learn to learn this material. I'm no lawyer but I know that 'talking' someone into sex who is not expected to know the implications of their actions is also illegal so taking advantage of children who don't fully understand the meaning of the class and might object to learning the material if they were more developed could also be construed as assault or violation. Next time remember that things that appear insane to you are most likely logical to someone with either more knowledge or a different value set than you.
no, your solution is a band-aid that only covers up the real problem. Voters that are swayed by fancy campaign ads are the real problem. If everyone in this country took their civic duty seriously and researched from reliable sources while completely discounting campaign ads that would fix the real problem. Prohibiting corporations from making contributions is protecting the electorate from themselves since they can't seem to do it. And as long as the electorate doesn't have to it wont and will never learn to.
there needs to be another level of mod points for funny. fucking hilarious. +5 funny doesn't do it justice.
just because you guessed a password does not mean you 'hacked' into anything.
which is a database culled from many databases and its own which we are not required to use if we really don't want to.
so in other words move along folks nothing to see here trust us weve gots learned trusts in me.
just because you 'have nothing to hide' doesn't mean everyone can and should be up in your business.
mostly it is the fact that a. it is required by law and b. it is all in one place. One database is much easier to search than thousands of them especially once 'inconsistencies' are found.
I can't wait until the day racial jokes are funny, as in how did we ever take that shit seriously.
I'm kind of disappointed that this got modded troll, I'm really just having a devil's advocate kind of day. So why are those things 'evil'?
2, although it is not a big stretch to take my argument another level of individuals not being able to force their views on others thus advocating anarchy which personally I don't think would work mostly and would instead advocate libertarianism.
"deprecate evil wherever it is." Question: whose evil? and "We can't change the world alone, but almost everyone should agree that freedom of speech, women's rights, and freedom of self-determination are a good thing." that is only a very very recent development I mean even slavery was only completely, at least legally, eradicated half way through the 1900's.
flame me but can't we just let countries choose their own path? there is no reason we need to force the American world view down everyone's throat. yes I do like my country but am awfully tired of our half assed attempts to export our way of life at all levels only when we see fit. we have supported as many dictators as democracies mostly because dictators are easier to please and get to follow our wishes.