well then you rude fool... give us a source! (and since as a previous poster pointed out, the internet will tell you that no Jews died on Sept 11 because they got a "phone call" and magnetic rings cure all ills, don't just give me a web page. give me an actual book. (i.e. it's ISBN which you can get off Amazon. oh, and it better be peer-reviewed. And since these are such obvious "facts", how about giving us a few books?
in the vast majority of instances, smallpox and other diseases were accidentally transmitted. (for one thing, they went ahead of the actual arrival of the Europeans). Interesting article about natives pre-contact can be found at the The Atlantic Monthly
Furthermore, even if we were to throw the facts out the window and declare that all European diseases were deliberately passed to natives, Germ Warfare != Medical Experimentation. Get your facts straight buddy.
I find it interesting that he's convinced that child-proof safety caps are all the doing of religious people. It sounds to me like he's one of those people I meet every once in a while who are convinced that all the things in this world they disagree with come from a single group of people. In contrast, I tend to think that this world is full of people, some of whom will share my opinions to greater or lesser degrees. His way of looking at the world sounds a bit paranoid if you ask me. (It's all THESE PEOPLE! It's ALL THEIR fault!)... pathetic if you ask me...
The only thing I can think of is that the scenario you laid out only applies to pirates, not to legitimate competitors.
Your scneario assumes a uniform product offered by multiple vendors. Think of gasoline, a tank of gas is tank of gas no matter where you get it from. (No one would pay 15cents per litre more to get Shell brand gasoline instead of BP brand gasoline, but compare that to how we buy jeans).
In software, only one company sells Adobe Photoshop and only one company sells MS Word. While similar products exist, there are distinct and noticable differences in features, quality, design etc. The only way of getting a (nearly) identical product is to pirate it.
The *costs* of piracy to the consumer are unlike the costs of a regular competitor. They're really like the costs of buying stolen goods. You have a degree of risk, ethical issues, and unkown quality. (Possible trojans, bad crack etc.)
that's right, you've exposed the conspiracy! these were really just a few little old ladies who wanted to download the cookie recipe e-mail, but the copyright holder on the recipe called his old skull & bones buddy down at the cable company and had him make up some story about stealing bandwidth. It's all a lie. Expose the tyranny! ..... .... ... .. . You Fool!
downloaded TV shows. Yes, this is also copyright infringement, but unlike DVD's or CD's, sometimes I just can't get the show any other way. The number of times the stupid CRTC rules have resulted in me recording the wrong channel and missing a show are too many to count.
Why should I have to pay extra so you can download mp3s, movies and iso files when all I ever use my connection for is web browsing, irc, email and SSH? I'm quite happy paying $20 a month instead.
Of course the same logic applies when we're talking about the way North Americans pay for local phone service vs. the way the Brits pay for it. They pay per minute for local calls I believe, and I think the Aussies pay a flat charge per local call like a payphone. (Somebody from those countries please correct me if I'm wrong). So the question I have for North America is "Why should I pay a high flat rate for my local phone service when I only make one 3 minute call per day just so you can talk all night on the phone with your friends?" Seriously. Some people's phone bill's would go down if we went away from flat rate pricing.
That doesn't mean we should do it of course. Flat rate pricing is easier and simpler. And since consumption would tend to go up when something like bandwidth or phone service is priced that way, costs should go down. (Economy of scale).
Biometrics: The identity thief does the same as above but places his/her biometric information on/in the card Results are the same either way.
Except that biometric data is more easily compared to a central database because it can be done completely automatically. If they swap the biometrics, the card won't match the database and if they don't swap the biometrics the card won't match them.
The same could be done with photos, but it's not as easy because people can grow beards, dye their hair, lose/gain weight etc. Last I checked I couldn't rip out my retinas and get them replaced. Checking the biometrics is easy. "Excuse me sir, please look into this while I scan your ID..."
What if you could convince your Senator or Congress-person to mirror the material? Do they have immunity for this sort of thing? Even if not, I'm sure there's more than one Senator out there who would enjoy ticking of the Scientologists.
I seem to remember that Canadian MP's have immunity for anything that they say in the House of Commons. While this probably doesn't extend to their official websites, it probably hasn't been tested. They could also table the offending material as part of a debate on the subject which would give them a reason to post it. Again, I don't know if any of this would be legal, but it would certainly be interesting to find out. (And I believe that both the US and Canadian governments have more money and more responsibility to do this that google does).
Leaving the grey stuff for later is an obvious invitation for lawsuits
possibly. It depends how you draft the law. The most obvious way would be to borrow from existing law. So if you want to post video on your site, the definitions on what should get zoned into.prn would be parallel to those found in traditional video markets. If you wanted to post pics or text, the definitions would be parallel to those in regular print media. These definitions already exist. It's not like we'd have to start from scratch. Not everybody likes these definitions. Some people think that they're too puritanical, and others think that Fox shouldn't be broadcast. But we manage to live with the content rules. Why not the same for the US portion of the internet.
That goes back to the original question. Since society wants zoning laws in the physical world, why not have zoning laws in the virtual world?
Out of curiosity, do you agree that zoning laws in the physical world are a good thing?
yes, you are missing a critical piece. but you can put in a fake version that piece and have it do nothing, but tell the software that it's working fine.
Here's some instructions on how to do this with Grokster, (same network). The site says that it supposedly works with KaZaA, but I haven't tried it out. Just use grokster. Exactly the same network, so it's no biggie. (Those instructions are windows only though)
I use gnutella and spyware-free grokster. I really want gnutella to succeed, but it just isn't up to snuff yet. It's tolerable for small files, but if I want to transfer anything more than a couple hundred megabytes, it just isn't as good. I despise the spyware that comes with the fast-track network, but they simply do have a superior network. (And I'm not a good enough programmer to contribute to the gnutella code)
What happens if one of these people gets in a position on authority on this hypothetical 'porn agency?
the same thing that would happen if it happened in the TV or print media world. You seeem to be missing the point. If we do it for TV and print media, why not for web sites?
Obvious stuff is easy. The grey line is the hard part.
Fair enough. Why don't we start with the obvious stuff and leave the grey area stuff for later? If it never gets sorted out... big deal. it'll still be in the.com and at least the anal/horse/fetish stuff won't pop up at me whenever I misspell an URL. (unfortunately, I think the.cx in goate.cx means that it wouldn't get covered by this bill).
Any objections to that?, or do you object to zoning the obvious stuff too?
Again, I'm not exactly sure why the US government wouldn't be an appropriate organization. (Because this doesn't affect 2 letter country code TLD's).
It's the only one that all citizens of the US have a say in. (although I'm not a citizen or resident of the US) Further, I assume that the US government already does this with television and print media as the Canadian government does up here. I don't exactly see why the web should be receive different treatment. (Although someone in another thread did bring up an interesting point about linking).
You're right that we'll never get total agreement on what constitutes porn, but we're not trying for that. We should be trying for a compromise that most of us can live with.
If I show pictures of breasts, am I.prn automagically? What if I run a site on breast cancer? Am I automatically.org?
You appear to be asking the obvious question of who should decide what is porn and how they would decide it.
I should think that was obvious. The US government (or appointed agency) will decide it, and they'll use a system similar to how they decide that penthouse is porn and Time Magazine is not.
Actually I'm making a big assumption here, the Canadian government does this up in Canada, and makes rules such as "pornographic magazines have to be on the top shelf and have all but the title obscured by an opaque material if they're being sold in a store that minors would have access to. (i.e. in 7-11) I assume the US has something similar? At the very least you have something like that for TV, I don't see a lot of porn on NBC...
I'm sorry, but that's obvious. The American government would or an organization appointed to do so by the US government. You might not like that, but that's the way it would work out.
With all the whining about how the internet is international, people seem to be missing the fact that the three-letter TLD's are essentially American. Just because they let foreigners register under three letter TLD's doesn't mean they have to. You'll notice that they're not exactly letting foreign governments use the.gov extension...
More to the point, this is the way it SHOULD be. A country controls it's own country code TLD. Wherever you are in the world, you are under the jurisdiction of a particular country, why should the internet be any different?
viewer gets rally, really excited, pulls his dick out and jerks it off til he cums, and then suddenly his sexual desires are gone
Well yes. However, the desires come back. So the viewer tries again. It might work a few times, and then he tries different porn. That works for a while, and then swapping porn doesn't work so much and he wants something "real". So he goes out and looks for something to actually stick his dick into.
In the case of pedo's, this means looking for children.
If porn eliminated the desire for actual contact with another person, then the sheer amount of hetero-porn out there would kill the market for hookers, or even eliminate the number of guys in bars looking for one-night-stands. Last I checked, there were still plenty of hookers in the world, and plenty of guys looking for one-night-stands.
Using porn is like scratching a mosquito bite. It helps at first, but then the itch comes back even stronger.
sure it's fair, but and it's funny to do it sometimes too. But if we're going to be realistic, it is true that Europe wouldn't have been able to stop Hitler without the help of the US. (Economic & hardware help before officially entering the war, and with troops, kicking ass and taking names after).
and the US military definately learned some lessons in Vietnam, but it's applied those lessons well. Fact is that the US is a sleepy giant that likes to be left alone. Wake it up and you will regret it. (Why can't Arabs figure this out)???
yeah, but you have video cameras recording your streets, and no Bill of Rights. I'm not an American, but I know which country's government is less intrusive. (And it ain't anyone it Europe)...
AKA the stolen property store. Hopefully they're not all like this, but I stopped going to used CD stores when I realized that the management of the ones I went to were turning a blind eye to the guy who came in with 200+ CD's in a duffle bag and claimed he was just getting rid of his old albums. (And then did the same thing again 2 days later).
actually they've got a point about not clogging up their computers. it's not "your" machine. it's the company's, so you don't have any right to put personal stuff on it. you should do this anyway. protect your company from getting it's butt sued.
Slashdot Mirror
well then you rude fool... give us a source! (and since as a previous poster pointed out, the internet will tell you that no Jews died on Sept 11 because they got a "phone call" and magnetic rings cure all ills, don't just give me a web page. give me an actual book. (i.e. it's ISBN which you can get off Amazon. oh, and it better be peer-reviewed. And since these are such obvious "facts", how about giving us a few books?
Furthermore, even if we were to throw the facts out the window and declare that all European diseases were deliberately passed to natives, Germ Warfare != Medical Experimentation. Get your facts straight buddy.
.
now that's funny...
I find it interesting that he's convinced that child-proof safety caps are all the doing of religious people. It sounds to me like he's one of those people I meet every once in a while who are convinced that all the things in this world they disagree with come from a single group of people. In contrast, I tend to think that this world is full of people, some of whom will share my opinions to greater or lesser degrees. His way of looking at the world sounds a bit paranoid if you ask me. (It's all THESE PEOPLE! It's ALL THEIR fault!)... pathetic if you ask me...
.
The only thing I can think of is that the scenario you laid out only applies to pirates, not to legitimate competitors.
Your scneario assumes a uniform product offered by multiple vendors. Think of gasoline, a tank of gas is tank of gas no matter where you get it from. (No one would pay 15cents per litre more to get Shell brand gasoline instead of BP brand gasoline, but compare that to how we buy jeans).
In software, only one company sells Adobe Photoshop and only one company sells MS Word. While similar products exist, there are distinct and noticable differences in features, quality, design etc. The only way of getting a (nearly) identical product is to pirate it.
The *costs* of piracy to the consumer are unlike the costs of a regular competitor. They're really like the costs of buying stolen goods. You have a degree of risk, ethical issues, and unkown quality. (Possible trojans, bad crack etc.)
.
that's right, you've exposed the conspiracy! these were really just a few little old ladies who wanted to download the cookie recipe e-mail, but the copyright holder on the recipe called his old skull & bones buddy down at the cable company and had him make up some story about stealing bandwidth. It's all a lie. Expose the tyranny!
.....
....
...
..
.
You Fool!
downloaded TV shows. Yes, this is also copyright infringement, but unlike DVD's or CD's, sometimes I just can't get the show any other way. The number of times the stupid CRTC rules have resulted in me recording the wrong channel and missing a show are too many to count.
.
Of course the same logic applies when we're talking about the way North Americans pay for local phone service vs. the way the Brits pay for it. They pay per minute for local calls I believe, and I think the Aussies pay a flat charge per local call like a payphone. (Somebody from those countries please correct me if I'm wrong). So the question I have for North America is "Why should I pay a high flat rate for my local phone service when I only make one 3 minute call per day just so you can talk all night on the phone with your friends?" Seriously. Some people's phone bill's would go down if we went away from flat rate pricing.
That doesn't mean we should do it of course. Flat rate pricing is easier and simpler. And since consumption would tend to go up when something like bandwidth or phone service is priced that way, costs should go down. (Economy of scale).
.
Except that biometric data is more easily compared to a central database because it can be done completely automatically. If they swap the biometrics, the card won't match the database and if they don't swap the biometrics the card won't match them.
The same could be done with photos, but it's not as easy because people can grow beards, dye their hair, lose/gain weight etc. Last I checked I couldn't rip out my retinas and get them replaced. Checking the biometrics is easy. "Excuse me sir, please look into this while I scan your ID..."
What if you could convince your Senator or Congress-person to mirror the material? Do they have immunity for this sort of thing? Even if not, I'm sure there's more than one Senator out there who would enjoy ticking of the Scientologists.
I seem to remember that Canadian MP's have immunity for anything that they say in the House of Commons. While this probably doesn't extend to their official websites, it probably hasn't been tested. They could also table the offending material as part of a debate on the subject which would give them a reason to post it. Again, I don't know if any of this would be legal, but it would certainly be interesting to find out. (And I believe that both the US and Canadian governments have more money and more responsibility to do this that google does).
possibly. It depends how you draft the law. The most obvious way would be to borrow from existing law. So if you want to post video on your site, the definitions on what should get zoned into .prn would be parallel to those found in traditional video markets. If you wanted to post pics or text, the definitions would be parallel to those in regular print media. These definitions already exist. It's not like we'd have to start from scratch. Not everybody likes these definitions. Some people think that they're too puritanical, and others think that Fox shouldn't be broadcast. But we manage to live with the content rules. Why not the same for the US portion of the internet.
That goes back to the original question. Since society wants zoning laws in the physical world, why not have zoning laws in the virtual world?
Out of curiosity, do you agree that zoning laws in the physical world are a good thing?
Here's some instructions on how to do this with Grokster, (same network). The site says that it supposedly works with KaZaA, but I haven't tried it out. Just use grokster. Exactly the same network, so it's no biggie. (Those instructions are windows only though)
I use gnutella and spyware-free grokster. I really want gnutella to succeed, but it just isn't up to snuff yet. It's tolerable for small files, but if I want to transfer anything more than a couple hundred megabytes, it just isn't as good. I despise the spyware that comes with the fast-track network, but they simply do have a superior network. (And I'm not a good enough programmer to contribute to the gnutella code)
I haven't fully checked it out, but I just installed it and it seems to work as promised. I'm due for a re-format anyway. (It's been over 8 months) ;)
the same thing that would happen if it happened in the TV or print media world. You seeem to be missing the point. If we do it for TV and print media, why not for web sites?
Fair enough. Why don't we start with the obvious stuff and leave the grey area stuff for later? If it never gets sorted out... big deal. it'll still be in the .com and at least the anal/horse/fetish stuff won't pop up at me whenever I misspell an URL. (unfortunately, I think the .cx in goate.cx means that it wouldn't get covered by this bill).
Any objections to that?, or do you object to zoning the obvious stuff too?
It's the only one that all citizens of the US have a say in. (although I'm not a citizen or resident of the US) Further, I assume that the US government already does this with television and print media as the Canadian government does up here. I don't exactly see why the web should be receive different treatment. (Although someone in another thread did bring up an interesting point about linking).
You're right that we'll never get total agreement on what constitutes porn, but we're not trying for that. We should be trying for a compromise that most of us can live with.
You appear to be asking the obvious question of who should decide what is porn and how they would decide it.
I should think that was obvious. The US government (or appointed agency) will decide it, and they'll use a system similar to how they decide that penthouse is porn and Time Magazine is not.
Actually I'm making a big assumption here, the Canadian government does this up in Canada, and makes rules such as "pornographic magazines have to be on the top shelf and have all but the title obscured by an opaque material if they're being sold in a store that minors would have access to. (i.e. in 7-11) I assume the US has something similar? At the very least you have something like that for TV, I don't see a lot of porn on NBC...
I'm sorry, but that's obvious. The American government would or an organization appointed to do so by the US government. You might not like that, but that's the way it would work out.
With all the whining about how the internet is international, people seem to be missing the fact that the three-letter TLD's are essentially American. Just because they let foreigners register under three letter TLD's doesn't mean they have to. You'll notice that they're not exactly letting foreign governments use the .gov extension...
More to the point, this is the way it SHOULD be. A country controls it's own country code TLD. Wherever you are in the world, you are under the jurisdiction of a particular country, why should the internet be any different?
Well yes. However, the desires come back. So the viewer tries again. It might work a few times, and then he tries different porn. That works for a while, and then swapping porn doesn't work so much and he wants something "real". So he goes out and looks for something to actually stick his dick into.
In the case of pedo's, this means looking for children.
If porn eliminated the desire for actual contact with another person, then the sheer amount of hetero-porn out there would kill the market for hookers, or even eliminate the number of guys in bars looking for one-night-stands. Last I checked, there were still plenty of hookers in the world, and plenty of guys looking for one-night-stands.
Using porn is like scratching a mosquito bite. It helps at first, but then the itch comes back even stronger.
Think about it!
It's from 1998, but I found it fairly interesting at the time.
sure it's fair, but and it's funny to do it sometimes too. But if we're going to be realistic, it is true that Europe wouldn't have been able to stop Hitler without the help of the US. (Economic & hardware help before officially entering the war, and with troops, kicking ass and taking names after).
and the US military definately learned some lessons in Vietnam, but it's applied those lessons well. Fact is that the US is a sleepy giant that likes to be left alone. Wake it up and you will regret it. (Why can't Arabs figure this out)???
.
HAHAHA
yeah, but you have video cameras recording your streets, and no Bill of Rights. I'm not an American, but I know which country's government is less intrusive. (And it ain't anyone it Europe)...
.
AKA the stolen property store. Hopefully they're not all like this, but I stopped going to used CD stores when I realized that the management of the ones I went to were turning a blind eye to the guy who came in with 200+ CD's in a duffle bag and claimed he was just getting rid of his old albums. (And then did the same thing again 2 days later).
so burn them to a CD and play them off the CD.
actually they've got a point about not clogging up their computers. it's not "your" machine. it's the company's, so you don't have any right to put personal stuff on it. you should do this anyway. protect your company from getting it's butt sued.
.